philwave at gmail.com
Fri May 17 08:12:01 CEST 2019
> 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
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
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).
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.
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
More information about the Development