[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-frameworks-devel
Subject:    Re: Header cleanup / Link interface (was kdewidgets: fix build)
From:       Kevin Ottens <ervin+bluesystems () kde ! org>
Date:       2013-07-22 11:10:14
Message-ID: 1948768.yy8vbWfjVs () wintermute
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Friday 19 July 2013 20:11:32 David Faure wrote:
> On Friday 19 July 2013 17:40:26 wojtask w wrote:
> > Before this task I want to cleanup public headers in tier1, tier2 and
> > stagging.
> > I have a question :)
> > 1. What is preferred <QtCore/QString> or <QString>?
> 
> Both work, so it doesn't really matter.
> 
> The qt4 theory was "always use QtCore/QString in public headers so that the
> include path doesn't have to contain QtCore, for crappy build systems" (not
> qmake, not cmake, so stuff like hand-written Makefiles or MSVC projects).
> 
> However the qt4-to-qt5 porting taught us that this created problems
> (QtGui/QLabel became QtWidgets/QLabel == additional porting, for an issue
> that wouldn't happen if we just used <QLabel>).
> 
> So I don't know ;)
> 
> If you want to make it consistent, let's just do like Qt does....
> Oh great -- they do something different: #include <QtCore/qstring.h>
> 
> Adding k-f-d to the CC. What do you guys think? Major search/replace, to
> follow Qt style?

I think we're good with just "#include <QLabel>" (for the porting reasons you 
invoked).

Regards.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

Sponsored by BlueSystems and KDAB to work on KDE Frameworks
["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]