Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On poniedziałek 22 listopad 2004 05:58 am, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:12:05AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> > >> | + v->setBottom(glen);
>> > >> | + return v;
>> > >> | +}
>> > >>
>> > >> I really dont' like these returning pointers.
>> > |
>> > | This is 'best Qt practice'. The pointees life time is taken care of by
>> > | its parent, and this is set at construction.
>> >
>> > One of the but-ugly parts of Qt it seems.
>>
>> Not the worst, I can assure you. Not the worst...
>>
>> Right now they are re-inventing STL. It's called 'Tulip'. The nice
>> thing that I can see so far is that one does not have to use it.
>
| I don't think this is such a bad idea.
Tja...
| Even if you think about performance
| only. E.g. if you compile your code with gcc, QString performs way better
| than std::string, for example.
Are you sure of this. I know that the std::string in libstdc++ has
gotten quite a bit of performance tweaks lately.
(gcc 3.4.x and 4.x)
--
Lgb
