[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] [GSoC] ftinspect
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] [GSoC] ftinspect |
Date: |
Sat, 06 May 2017 19:47:00 +0200 (CEST) |
> This was already some time ago, so I hope it's ok if I send it to
> the list now to get it out of the pipeline.
Thanks a lot! I'm struggling with some nasty and time consuming
issues which still delay the release...
> The commits were made starting at 1dd90ae. I can rebase if needed.
Please do so!
Some remarks.
. Is C++11 really necessary? Or to ask differently, are the new
features that come with C++11 (`auto', `override', etc.) of real
importance?
In general, I like a conservative approach so that C++ code can be
compiled even on older boxes. Admittedly, I'm not a big fan of C++
(and not a big C++ coder either), but given that FreeType itself is
written in quite conservative code, `qtinspect' should probably use
a similar path.
. In patch 10 you are using the `auto' keyword. My gut feeling says
that `auto' is fine for templates and the like but otherwise normal
types are preferable, especially if there is an explicit
`static_cast' (additionally, it's a C++11 feature, but this item is
unrelated). What do you think?
Werner