I don't understand this question.

How do you think about information from Cppcheck's forum and issue tracker? Do you care for software aspects which can be discussed there?

What further software evolution ?

You might occasionally find SQL data models more promising, don't you?

@elfring said in Returning C++ references from more programming interfaces?:

For example, why should Qt provide extensions that break encapsulation and increase the risk of errors?

I suggest to use algorithms which can work together with container classes at more source code places.

You did not address any of the concerns. You only added suggestions.

That is not acceptable. You must only submit ideas/proposals that don't break encapsulation.

How do you think about the usage of customised constructor implementations for the class “QStandardItem”?

Of course I'll cast my -1 vote as well.

I'll add to point 1:

If the data contained in the model is all of basic types or implicitly shared types then it's possible to already use the current framework without ever triggering any expensive* copy

, to point 2:

There's no clarity on how to support different types in different roles would we need an additional template argument for each used role beyond Qt::UserRole? is so the problems above grow exponentially with the roles

And to point 3:

No possible implementation for a reliable dataChanged emission if model internals are exposed directly

*expensive = a copy that implies more that a:

memcpy of less than 65bits and an increase/decrease of a numeric reference counter

@elfring said in Support for multi-index containers?:

Would you like to distinguish any more between the usage of one- and two-dimensional structures for data models?

Nope, the 2 dimensional structure is strictly more general of the 1D version so anything that goes for the first works in the second case.

beginRant();

You have been discussing a lot of theoretical problems relating to models across different threads. In all of them the feeling has been that you are uselessly overcomplicating things.
I feel it would be useful for you and easier for us to walk you through a concrete example of what you are trying to achieve rather than discuss endlessly on theoretical concepts.

endRant();

I'll update this post once I go anywhere with it

This feedback sounds promising.

I am becoming more curious around another description for a similar use case:
An associative table can be created. QStandardItem objects can be generated then based on table entries. Which ways would you like to recommend for the connection of entities to their relationship data?

@elfring said in Software development challenges around index creation for data models:

Will your data source work without hierarchies then?

I don't follow. This is a table model, there's no hierarchy here.

Hi,

QAbstractListModel

That I don't know.

If you have an interesting re-usable model to share then you can do a submission.

Imagine these methods become available in a future version of Qt:

I suggest to take another look for a clarification try around the topic “Checking the API status for the variable “Private d” of the QVariant class”.