[Interest] Interest Digest, Vol 79, Issue 19

Thiago Macieira thiago.macieira at intel.com
Thu Apr 26 18:01:23 CEST 2018

On Thursday, 26 April 2018 01:37:04 PDT Ulf Hermann wrote:
> > When I said "most machines are little-endian", I was referring to machines
> > Qt runs on and, therefore, would use QDataStream. The fact that the
> > default is big endian is short-sighted. It should default to
> > little-endian.
> We could change the default. All it takes is a new QDataStream::Version,
> isn't it? (And whoever prefers big endian can then still setByteOrder() on
> the data stream).

We could, but it would make the code cumbersome, because someone could call 
setByteOrder() before setVersion(). We'd need to keep the byte order as a tri-
state and then apply the default only if the user didn t set it.

At this point, I'm thinking long-term we should think of whether we should 
deprecate QDataStream or whether the discussion we had on basing it on CBOR 
makes more sense.

Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

More information about the Interest mailing list