alexander.blasche at qt.io
Wed Sep 7 08:36:43 CEST 2022
>From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org> on behalf of Volker Hilsheimer <volker.hilsheimer at qt.io>
>I agree that it would be great if users of Qt could flip on aggressive compile options to get warnings about narrowing-conversions.
>But again, is that worth it? And is that more important to users than having a few releases of Qt where they don’t have to constantly
>chase after new deprecations? I honestly doubt it. I know a few folks in the Creator and Design Studio teams that would love a Qt
>release or two with no new warnings.
>So, I in principle agree with your plan, but let’s focus on the modules where there is at least a plausible usecase for >2G data.
>For the rest, reach out to the respective maintainers, please.
I'd like to rephrase the above to ensure I correctly understand Volker here:
The suggestion is to do the conversion to API's which benefit from >2G data only. In such cases the changes would be done such that we only add the converted API behind guards which come into effect in Qt 7 (QT_DEPRECATED_SINCE/QT_REMOVED_SINCE(7,0)). This means we don't need fancy overload solution for getter like
int size() vs qsizetype size()
as we are talking about a switch at Qt 7 time. Is this your suggestion Volker?
I would support this solution as I have the same concern about never-ending porting requirements for our users.
More information about the Development