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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: KSpread: Value's implicitly sharing
From:       "Ariya Hidayat" <ariya () kde ! org>
Date:       2007-01-12 17:28:18
Message-ID: ba035dd10701120928u358ba49esbe75b2bcfa40d098 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> is there a reason why Value does not use the implicitly sharing offered by Qt?

Because I created this long long time ago, before the existence of
QSharedData(Pointer).

> I remember one bug (zeros all over), that was caused by a missing detaching
> of the data. I'd prefer Qt's built-in way, as it pulls the whole logic behind
> the scenes and opens the door for multi-threading.

> Should it be converted or should it stay as is until multi-threading takes
> place? Or is there any other good reason for the one or the other?

I vote for conversion. But don't ask me to do the conversion :-)



Regards,

Ariya
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]