<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Cyrille Berger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cberger@cberger.net">cberger@cberger.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Friday 23 October 2009, Dmitry Kazakov wrote:<br>
> PS:<br>
> /me still thinks that using strings for internally used constants is a bad<br>
> practice =)<br>
> And /me doesn't think implicit sharing of QString will excuse it.<br>
> But i wont argue about it this time =)<br>
</div>The problem is that those strings are not internal, and we want the set of<br>
composite op to be extensible. That's why we moved from int to qstring. As as<br>
side note, since QString (even with implicite sharing) comparison can be<br>
extensive, there is a class in pigment that gives you an integer for a string<br>
that can be stored to get fast comparison, we do that for comparing to<br>
colorspace. Here it would be an improvement, but the real fix is to migrate the<br>
remaining composite op.<br></blockquote><div><br>Why ints are not extensible?</div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Dmitry Kazakov<br>