[patch] Looking for an opinion on std::auto_ptr
aumuell at reserv.at
Wed Oct 22 15:25:04 CEST 2008
On Mon October 20 2008, Mark Kretschmann wrote:
> > You'd probably be better off using QPointer instead of std:auto_ptr, if
> > only because Amarok uses Qt wherever possible. It looks like the only
> > place that STL is used in core Amarok code is a couple of places where I
> > used STL algorithms where no Qt equivalent exists.
> Getting completely rid of STL is actually a noble goal, as it could
> potentially reduce startup times.
I don't expect that the Standard Template Library causes notable startup
delays as it does not link to additional shared libraries: all the code is
generated at compile time and contained within the Amarok binary/shlibs. So I
don't think that this is a reason to stop to profit from the Qt container
classes' STL compatibility.
More information about the Amarok-devel