[PATCH]: KURLDrag::decode() and the use ofexplicit

[Dawit A.]

X-BeenThere: kde-core-devel at mail.kde.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: kde-core-devel at kde.org
List-Id: KDE Core Development <kde-core-devel.mail.kde.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-core-devel>,
	<mailto:kde-core-devel-request at mail.kde.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:kde-core-devel at mail.kde.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kde-core-devel-request at mail.kde.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-core-devel>,
	<mailto:kde-core-devel-request at mail.kde.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: kde-core-devel-bounces-+kde-kde-core-devel=m.gmane.org at mail.kde.org
Errors-To: kde-core-devel-bounces-+kde-kde-core-devel=m.gmane.org at mail.kde.org

On Monday 21 July 2003 06:09, André Wöbbeking wrote:
> On Monday 21 July 2003 10:29, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > On Saturday 19 July 2003 10:14, André Wöbbeking wrote:
> >
> > I think adding explicit would break source compatibility. Other than
> > I think it's a good idea to add it (locally) to see what breaks and
> > convert all code in CVS to use explicit casts.
>
> Can we add explicit before KDE 4.0? And if so it should be done for all
> of kdelibs (at least).

Just playing the devil's advocate... Why would one do KURL (42) again ?  
Were you simply making a hypothetical point ? If we are going to add explicit 
ctors, are we going to do it for all the other data types as well ? IMHO, it 
should be the responsibility of the programmer to doing something like 

KURL (QString::number(42)) 

There is no need to make KURL more bloated than it already is just to 
accommodate a few corner cases...  Just my 2 cents FWIW.

-- 
Regards,
Dawit A.
"By filing this bug report you have challenged 
the honor of my family. Prepare to die!"