[Development] Views

[Philippe]

> No-one uses C++ unless they need the extra performance.

This is mostly right, though wide portability can be another reason.

This being said, that does not mean that every line of a C++ application
needs to be optimized with CPU cycles in mind.
In my experience, only restricted portions need to be optimized (desktop
application developer here).

This is why I use Qt containers when I need convenience, and specialized
containers when I need speed. And in that last case, that depend on the
context (eg. there are a variery of map implementations, each one with some
advantages).

If we had a magic stick to switch all Qt containers to the STL library
containers, that would not prevent the need to use dedicated
containers when speed really matters. Hence, I am fine with today Qt
containers.

And today, I can quote an example of an important container that Qt
provides but that C++20 does not (correct me if I am wrong):
QVarLengthArray (even if, here again, they are faster implementations
when one (rarely) need move semantics support).

Philippe

On Fri, 17 May 2019 07:47:55 +0200
"Mutz, Marc via Development" <development at qt-project.org> wrote:

> On 2019-05-16 23:41, Konstantin Shegunov wrote:
> > you end up where the STL is - so convoluted it's hardly worth making
> > anything with it.
> 
> Qt is a C++ library. If you don't like C++, either stay in QML or use 
> Java. No-one uses C++ unless they need the extra performance.
> 
> It is not Qt's job to change the decisions made by the C++ standards 
> committee. If you want to change the STL, submit a paper to WG21, not 
> rant on a Qt mailing-list.
> 
> Thanks,
> Marc
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development