Closed tomFlowee closed 8 months ago
it would be nice if they follow the (granted ugly) unsafe behavior we inherited from the time when we were still walking in bearskins
😆 How can I say no to that picturesque description, when we've been reading Auel lately? mutable
it shall be...
This is a followup of sorts to bug #592, but now for a differnent issue that likely is a regression for the exact same usecase as that bug.
The simple code of:
today fails due to the QCoreApplication having the constructor:
QCoreApplication::QCoreApplication(int &argc, char **argv)
notice the ampersant there.
I would argue the same as the person that reported bug 592 that the
argc
andargv
are there for backwards compatibility and it would be nice if they follow the (granted ugly) unsafe behavior we inherited from the time when we were still walking in bearskins.Which is to say, would you consider removing the const on
args.argc
in order to make this library class's constructor work.