Once upon a time, the Qt people joked about switching Qt to
snake_case in one of the April Fools posts.
But even if it was a joke, it did trigger me and Vishesh to talk (argue?) about it during one of aKademies.
One of the strange things I’ve noticed is that when I’m writing code
that is Qt-based, I tend to use camelCase most of the time,
but at the same time (in the same project) I tend to use
snake_case when I’m creating generic functions. For
example, a for-each algorithm that works on associative containers would
be called for_each_assoc instead of
forEachAssoc. This is the place where Vishesh did not agree
with me.
You might ask me why I’m bringing this up now, quite a few years after the discussion.
I’ve been digging through Qt code, and I’ve encountered this:
inline QModelIndex create_index(
int row, int column,
QHash<QModelIndex, Mapping*>::const_iterator it) const
{
return q_func()->createIndex(row, column, *it);
}
void _q_sourceDataChanged(const QModelIndex &source_top_left,
const QModelIndex &source_bottom_right,
const QVector<int> &roles);
void _q_sourceHeaderDataChanged(
Qt::Orientation orientation, int start, int end);
void _q_sourceLayoutAboutToBeChanged(
const QList<QPersistentModelIndex> &sourceParents,
QAbstractItemModel::LayoutChangeHint hint);
void _q_sourceLayoutChanged(
const QList<QPersistentModelIndex> &sourceParents,
QAbstractItemModel::LayoutChangeHint hint);
void _q_sourceRowsAboutToBeInserted(const QModelIndex &source_parent,
int start, int end);
void _q_sourceRowsInserted(const QModelIndex &source_parent,
int start, int end);I’d say that Qt is a true framework for the new age of political correctness – it does not discriminate against any of the naming styles. :)
p.s. I’ve posted this just for fun, please do not post comments about which naming convention is better etc. No reason to start a flamewar here.
