[Development] QList

[Rafael Roquetto]

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:47:36AM +0000, Martin Smith wrote:
> > I'm not even counting the argument from authority when
> >CS/Math were brought to the table without an invitation
> 
> 
> I will keep bringing them to the table because, as a documentation guy following this and other similar discussions, it looks like you (plural) are willing to ignore the importance of naming things in the API because of technical problems with implementations in C++.

I would like to just highlight the a informal fallacy of redefinition I have seen in this thread.
Some people are talking apples + oranges here.
A lot of people who speak C will use the word vector interchangeably with the
word 'array'. You don't need to go much farther: in C++, without further
context, a vector clearly means std::vector (but could still mean the same as
an array, or even QVector, depending on the context). It clearly has nothing
to do anymore with the vector from my geometry classes. I don't know why it received
the named 'vector' in first place, but I am willing to bet this is the
derivation that some people in linguistics call a 'dead metaphor' (except that
the original vector is still alive). It happens all the time in the evolution
of languages. A good example by Guy Deutscher:

"“Thrill”

“Goes back to an old English verb “thryllian” which originally meant pierce.

The current sense of “thrill” must have started out as a metaphor with some
shock value: “I’m thrilled to bits” must have been a graphic equivalent of
today’s “it’s killing”."

Just my two cents.



> 
> ________________________________
> From: Development <development-bounces+martin.smith=qt.io at qt-project.org> on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dangelo at kdab.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 1:35:20 PM
> To: development at qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] QList
> 
> Il 27/03/2017 13:05, Philippe ha scritto:
> > QPolygon needs not be a QVector
> > QPolygon can be a QVector
> > QPolygon can be a QList
> 
> ... which confirms the fallacy.
> 
> >
> > ...but *today*, QPolygon is "implemented as a QVector"
> > Hence from the OO common dialect, QPolygon is-a QVector
> 
> This subthread wasn't arguing with that (and you've already got an
> answer about why "implemented as a QVector" was a bad idea), but with
> the formal fallacies in the arguments exposed so far (four in four
> messages, and I'm not even counting the argument from authority when
> CS/Math were brought to the table without an invitation).
> 
> Cheers,
> --
> Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dangelo at kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
> KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908
> KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
> 

> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development


-- 
Rafael Roquetto | rafael.roquetto at kdab.com | Software Engineer
Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
Tel. Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
KDAB - Qt Experts
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3599 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20170327/47ccfbf7/attachment.bin>