[Qt-interest] Configure QtDesigner ui.h

[Scott Aron Bloom]

The projects are mostly Qt, and they have accepted Qt with no
problems...

The coding style of boost, and Ill be even more bluntly then before..
Sucks.  Sorry, not everything is a fricking template.   When using
boost, I have seen object files quadruple in size even with PCH turned
on...

Not to mention, its ~1GB store on every machine that needs to be able to
build off network.. Ie, all offsite developers.. Taking 1.5 Hours + to
download via SVN...

Most of my production level projects, move slowly when it comes to
compilers.. I had one client, who is still on Dev 6, and Gcc 3.2.. Why?
It works, the product is stable and making money.  And only critical
bugs are considered for fix.  If the fix was a memory leak, I couldn't
even consider boost..  

Now, most have moved to Dev 2008, not 2001.  So auto_ptr is the solution
for them.  Boost could be used, with the necessary hacks for 2008.  Many
are still on about a 2 year old gcc.

Again, moving a 30-40 person dev team to a new compiler, just to make
the boost people happy, is not going to happen.

For this issue, ie, having a single instantiation of the ui.h file, that
does not require explicit deletion, auto_pointer works, has low
overhead, no risk
Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: qt-interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs.com at qt.nokia.com
[mailto:qt-interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs.com at qt.nokia.com] On
Behalf Of Danny Price
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 2:34 PM
To: Thiago Macieira
Cc: qt-interest at qt.nokia.com
Subject: Re: [Qt-interest] Configure QtDesigner ui.h

Where exactly did I claim that 'using boost will solve ALL your memory
problems'? You're the one making generic statements.

I said that not using boost because you're worried about introducing a
dependency is a poor justification for risking easy-to-make mistakes
with bald pointers. Believe me I've seen it. This is not 1998. We have
better tools now. You're using Qt. You have QSharedPointer at least. Use
it.

On 2 Sep 2011, at 22:03, Thiago Macieira wrote:

> He's right. You're again making a very generic claim that using boost 
> will solve all of your memory problems. That's not correct.


On 2 Sep 2011, at 22:03, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> 
> He's right. You're again making a very generic claim that using boost 
> will solve all of your memory problems. That's not correct.

Again WHERE did I make such a claim?

> 
> It might help, but you may still do things wrong:
> 
> 	int i;
> 	boost::scoped_ptr<int> ptr(&i);

Oh very clever. How about less obvious problems like double deletes or
references (&) to deleted objects passed to other functions, errors that
some big compilers will not catch. Or implementing command-pattern
classes where you cannot control the ownership of object lifetimes or
have to treat every assignment with suspicion?
_______________________________________________
Qt-interest mailing list
Qt-interest at qt.nokia.com
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-interest