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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Proposal to replace Value by QVariant (Re: koffice/kspread)
From:       Johannes Simon <johannes.simon () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-10-17 11:49:25
Message-ID: 1192621765.22475.14.camel () Speedstar
[Download RAW message or body]

Ok, I renamed Value::data() to Value::asVariant().

In fact, I thought it wouldn't make much of a difference in performance
when using a QVariant instead of a self-implemented class holding its
own union of variables. After all, you might be right, since we're
talking about potentially huge spreadsheets. I don't know much about
Qt's internals, so I'll leave that to you.

> Either way, if you think, it's worth the effort for whatever reason go ahead. 
> I don't mind.
What I was thinking is that it would save us a lot of code because we
wouldn't need to explicitly handle the different data types anymore, as
QVariant would take care of that. That was my main point there. If the
current implementation of KSpread::Value really is more efficient than
QVariant, and it really makes a difference, I agree with you that
performance is more important.

Joh

_______________________________________________
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]