Review Request 112717: Start adopting QCollator

[Aleix Pol Gonzalez]

> On Sept. 18, 2013, 3:22 p.m., Mark Gaiser wrote:
> > How RUDE to just commit this without a addressing the concerns Frank and i have. That is not appreciated!

Alright, maybe I didn't think this through. I'll un-deprecate and bring back the KStringHandler::naturalCompare code as you want.

Said that, I doubt these concerns make that much a difference. QCollator has to be adopted. Not because of performance reasons but localization alone. Performance will happen as well, but for that we need development on the applications side, which I'm afraid cannot be up to me as well.

Either way, if you really shouldn't consider ::naturalCompare as a solution. ICU is much better tested than naturalCompare (yes, even) and has people more qualified than us by making it locale aware (::naturalCompare implementation is naive to localization).


- Aleix


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/112717/#review40277
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 18, 2013, 2:58 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/112717/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 18, 2013, 2:58 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Frameworks, Frank Reininghaus and Aurélien Gâteau.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Now that QCollator is public API, I wanted to give it a try, so I decided to port all uses KStringHandler::naturalCompare() to QCollator.
> 
> All the porting was quite straightforward I'd say, the only weird part is that I removed some tests of the KStringHandler tests. There are 2 kind of tests disabled:
> - The ones that say that "A" == "a" in case of Qt::CaseInsensitive. ICU is deterministic and it will decide itself which one goes in, so the test doesn't make sense anymore.
> - There's a mention to the 237788 bug where in some cases our former algorithm wouldn't be deterministic. This doesn't apply anymore, but also now ICU takes care about it now, so there's little point of keeping unit testing it.
> I decided to leave the unit test because it might be useful eventually (although note that it was not being compiled so far). In any case we probably want it out.
> 
> In any case, the rest seems straightforward enough. I didn't concentrate on performance though, in some cases we'll want to use the QCollatorSortKey.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   KDE5PORTING.html 1287de7 
>   kfile/kdirsortfilterproxymodel.cpp 7c7aa5f 
>   kfile/kurlnavigatorbutton.cpp d2c27fd 
>   staging/itemviews/src/CMakeLists.txt 353a413 
>   staging/itemviews/src/kcategorizedsortfilterproxymodel.h a21e7ca 
>   staging/itemviews/src/kcategorizedsortfilterproxymodel.cpp c8b652d 
>   staging/itemviews/src/kcategorizedsortfilterproxymodel_p.h eb1a67b 
>   staging/kcompletion/src/kcompletion.cpp 5f60a6c 
>   staging/xmlgui/src/kshortcutsdialog_p.h ab102bc 
>   staging/xmlgui/src/kshortcutseditoritem.cpp e89a8aa 
>   tier1/kcoreaddons/autotests/CMakeLists.txt 19227dc 
>   tier1/kcoreaddons/autotests/kstringhandlertest.cpp d12f086 
>   tier1/kcoreaddons/src/lib/text/kstringhandler.h 1b08f6f 
>   tier1/kcoreaddons/src/lib/text/kstringhandler.cpp 2f192aa 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/112717/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Builds, affected tests pass.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Aleix Pol Gonzalez
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20130918/41ac8b64/attachment.html>