[Development] Qt 5 types under consideration for deprecation / removal in Qt 6

Иван Комиссаров abbapoh at gmail.com
Sun Jun 9 00:30:23 CEST 2019


No, they should not. 

C++ committee understands the problem of ugly iterators and it seems they have a solution - ranges.

Why do you want to use qSort instead of std::ranges::sort?

QVector<int> v;
qSort(v);
std::ranges::sort(v);

I don’t see any advantages of the qSort() here.
No more ugly begin/end pair. Problem solved. There’s no use-case for the qSort.

> 9 июня 2019 г., в 0:09, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> написал(а):
> 
> QtAlgorithms should just be undeprecated. I don't care whether std::sort is 
> faster. If the version of Qt I tested with was fast enough, then I'm 
> perfectly fine with newer versions not being faster, no matter how fast some 
> incompatible implementation elsewhere is (and I don't care whether it 
> happens to ship with my compiler or not).
> 
>        Kevin Kofler
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development



More information about the Development mailing list