On Wednesday, 2 September 2020 23:54:35 PDT Lars Knoll wrote: > I think we have long in most of the important places today. I agree that > adding long to the overload set is somewhat annoying, but it could be an > inline method mapping to QIntegerForSize<sizeof(long)>::type. > > Has anybody ever looked how many places we would actually have problems with > that? I doubt it’s that many.
That's adding support for long without changing QIntegerForSize, which in turn defines what qsizetype is. As I said, I oppose qint64 and qsizetype not being the same type on 64-bit platforms. If we change this, then our overload set goes from typedefs to the basic ones: int, long and long long. Don't use int64_t or size_t or qint64 or qsizetype. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
