Alumni
|
And question: Is there anything else I should be doing besides simply posting to the review board to alert people that something's there?
|
Alumni
|
Nevermind. I just noticed it fires something off to a mailing list when I publish.
|
Administrator
|
Yes, these can be ignored, as they are messages from the developers to remind themselves / warn themselves of unfinished areas to work on later. The includes, foreach, explicit ctors and single char QString patches are all good and can be submitted to reviewboard also.
KDE Sysadmin
[img]content/bcooksley_sig.png[/img] |
Alumni
|
Would I put cpptoxml under the kdelibs group as well? |
Administrator
|
Yes, as that component is probably maintained by someone on kde-core-devel ( or someone on that list will know who to get to review it )
KDE Sysadmin
[img]content/bcooksley_sig.png[/img] |
Alumni
|
Reviewboard is saying that switching to d pointers isn't binary compatible, so any changes like that to kdesupport/attica can't be done.
http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/3401/ The guy doing the reviewing seems unsure as to whether or not changing: Private* d; to: Private * const d; breaks binary compatibility. Does it? |
Administrator
|
Judging by Techbase I would say it breaks Binary Compatibility.
KDE Sysadmin
[img]content/bcooksley_sig.png[/img] |
Alumni
|
http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/3423/ The review board is saying changes should probably be like so:
as opposed to:
Sound about right? |
Administrator
|
Yes it does, since it isn't the bool which is const, but the compare operation itself...
KDE Sysadmin
[img]content/bcooksley_sig.png[/img] |
Alumni
|
|
Alumni
|
|
Alumni
|
|
Alumni
|
|
Alumni
|
|
Alumni
|
kdegraphics/okular
Check for C++ ctors that should be declared 'explicit' http://pastebin.com/qRpvpnii |
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], kesang, Sogou [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]