[Qt-interest] [ANN] ODB C++ ORM adds support for Qt

[Boris Kolpackov]

Hi Stephen,

Stephen Kelly <steveire at gmail.com> writes:

> That's a really odd argument. What does prefixing with a Q have to do with
> blending in? What do you mean blend in? Confuse people into thinking ODB and
> Qt are one and the same?

I think people who decide to put QLazySharedPointer into their programs
will have a pretty good understanding of where its implementation comes
from.

The goal was to make persistence classes look and feel just like ordinary
classed that use Qt components. In an ordinary class you would have
something like this:

QSharedPointer<Employer> employer_;

In a persistent class you may want to change it to the lazy version:

QLazySharedPointer<Employer> employer_;

I think you would agree that the above line is much closer to the
original version than, say, this:

ODB::LazySharedPointer<Employer> employer_;

Honestly, I didn't expect this to be such a contentious and emotional
issue. All we wanted to do is make it more convenient for people who
use Qt to persist their objects. We thought we would try to name lazy
versions of Qt pointers as close to Qt style as possible. And if this
caused any problems, we would change it. But I guess we will change it
in the next version regardless, seeing that there are such strong
opinions about this matter.

Boris