[Interest] Qt API annoyances: where to log/discuss?

[Jean-Michaël Celerier]

On 22/11/2018 10:03, Dmitriy Purgin wrote:
>
> The ranges-v3 library is fine and usable, but by using it in a 
> customer project one has to consider additional dependencies, 
> licenses, portability, maintainability, correctness of the library and 
> its long-term support. The authors state themselves that the library 
> is experimental and subject to change. One of the reasons Qt is so 
> successful is that "it has it all", it's well documented, it generally 
> can be seen as a single dependency, and you generally expect good 
> quality and portability between supported platforms.


As much as I like Qt, I would trust the code quality of ranges-v3 much 
more than Qt's. Never had "project-threathening" bugs with ranges-v3, 
unlike Qt.