blocks|key|2263331|text|这篇文章看起来不错。它比较了Qt模板库和标准模板库：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2263332|2263333|QTL+vs+STL|unordered-list-item|offset|length|2263334|2263335|希望，您会发现看到文章中列出的所有差异是很有趣的。|2263336|编辑：|2263337|以下是我发现的有趣之处：|2263338|2263339|我的观点是，最大的优势是它在Qt支持的所有OSes上都有相同的实现(包括二进制兼容性)。当涉及到性能时，一些STL实现可能低于标准，或者它们可能缺少功能。有些平台甚至没有STL！另一方面，STL更具可定制性，并且在头文件…中完整可用。就像我说的，没有明显的赢家。|blockquote|style|BOLD|2263340|2263341|2263342|就像他说的，没有明显的赢家。但阅读这篇文章仍然会让很多事情变得清晰。知道其中的区别比去找一个而不知道另一个要好得多。|2263343|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|https://web.archive.org/web/20160902015144/http://blog.codeimproved.net/posts/qtl-stl.html^0|0|0|0|A|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|6|A|39|D|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|16|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|17|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|C|3|D|5|E|7|18|8|@]|9|@$F|19|G|1A|1|1B]]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|1C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|J|5|6|7|1D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|K|3|L|5|6|7|1E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|6|7|1F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|O|3|-4|5|6|7|1G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|P|3|Q|5|R|7|1H|8|@$F|1I|G|1J|S|T]|$F|1K|G|1L|S|T]]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|U|3|-4|5|6|7|1M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|V|3|-4|5|6|7|1N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|W|3|X|5|6|7|1O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|Y|3|-4|5|6|7|1P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|Z|$10|$5|11|12|13|A|$14|15]]]]

This article loooks good. It compares Qt Template Library with Standard Template Library:

<ul>
<li><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20160902015144/http://blog.codeimproved.net/posts/qtl-stl.html" rel="noreferrer">QTL vs STL</a></li>
</ul>

Hope, you'll find it interesting seeing all the differences listed there in the article.

EDIT:

Here is what I find interesting:

<blockquote>
 My opinion is that the biggest
 advantage of the QTL is that it has
 the same implementation (including
 binary compatibility) on all OSes
 supported by Qt. Some STL
 implementations might be below par
 when it comes to performance or they
 might be missing functionality. Some
 platforms don’t even have an STL! On
 the other hand, the STL is more
 customizable and is available in its
 entirety in header files… Like I said,
 there is no clear winner.
</blockquote>

Like he said, no clear winner. But still reading the article makes lots of things clear. Its better to know the difference than going for one, without knowing the other.

blocks|key|206104|text|QVector类被引用计数，并且适合在不复制的情况下被共享。Qt提供了许多对应于STL容器的容器。这篇文档描述了这些，并对其内部结构进行了一些解释和一些基本原理：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|206105|206106|Inside+the+Qt+4+Containers|unordered-list-item|offset|length|206107|206108|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|https://doc.qt.io/archives/qq/qq19-containers.html^0|0|0|0|Q|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|C|3|D|5|E|7|S|8|@]|9|@$F|T|G|U|1|V]]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|J|$K|$5|L|M|N|A|$O|P]]]]

The QVector class is reference counted and is geared to being shared without copying. Qt provides a lot of containers that correspond to STL containers. A document that describes these with some explanation of the internals and a bit of rationale:

<ul>
<li><a href="https://doc.qt.io/archives/qq/qq19-containers.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Inside the Qt 4 Containers</a></li>
</ul>

blocks|key|1825933|text|来自over+here|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1825934|1825935|+Qt起源于C%2B%2B和标准库没有标准化或编译器没有很好地支持的时代。因此，它复制了许多现在在标准库中的东西，比如容器和类型信息。最重要的是，他们修改了C%2B%2B语言来提供信号，这样Qt类就不能很容易地与非Qt类一起使用。|blockquote|1825936|1825937|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://live.gnome.org/gtkmm/FAQ^0|2|9|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@$A|R|B|S|1|T]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|E|3|F|5|G|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|J|$K|$5|L|M|N|C|$O|P]]]]

From <a href="http://live.gnome.org/gtkmm/FAQ">over here</a>:

<blockquote>
 Qt originates from a time when C++ and
 the standard library were not
 standardized or well supported by
 compilers. It therefore duplicates a
 lot of stuff that is now in the
 standard library, such as containers
 and type information. Most
 significantly, they modified the C++
 language to provide signals, so that
 Qt classes can not be used easily with
 non-Qt classes.
</blockquote>

blocks|key|2268988|text|我使用QTL的糟糕经历与QTL没有引发任何异常有关；这使得跟踪和修复关键错误变得更加困难。此外，STL实现与编译器密切相关，因为库的某些部分需要特定于编译器的语言扩展。这意味着STL实现通常可以胜过QTL，后者需要可移植性，因此无法从上述扩展中受益。不过，调试问题对我来说很关键。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|2268989|entityMap^0|3|3|C|3|1C|3|2G|3|2R|3|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@$9|I|A|J|B|C]|$9|K|A|L|B|C]|$9|M|A|N|B|C]|$9|O|A|P|B|C]|$9|Q|A|R|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|S|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|G|$]]

The bad experience I've had with <code>QTL</code> was related to <code>QTL</code> not raising any exceptions; this makes it harder to trace and fix critical errors. Also, <code>STL</code> implementations are closely related to a compiler, because parts of the library require compiler-specific extensions to the language. This means a <code>STL</code> implementation can often outperform <code>QTL</code>, which needs to be portable and therefore cannot benefit from said extensions. The debugging issue was critical for me though.

blocks|key|3897260|text|由于没有答案提到，Qt容器，包括QVector，通常有一个更完整的应用程序接口，这确实实现了一定程度的额外便利，并减少了与std::vector相比的冗长。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|3897261|QVector并没有真正集成到Qt中，这个角色是由不合适的QList承担的，所以使用QVector实现与Qt的整体更好的兼容性并不是一个很有说服力的理由。请注意，这可能会在Qt6中发生变化，因为QList的缺点越来越多地得到承认。|3897262|也就是说，如果您的应用程序已经依赖于Qt，那么为了方便起见，使用QVector是很有意义的。我假设没有人会仅仅为一两个容器添加像Qt这样臃肿的依赖项。QVector是一个高效和可靠的执行者，可以在Qt支持的任何平台上顺利运行。|3897263|另一方面，如果你想做一个框架不可知的核心逻辑应用程序接口，如果可能的话，最好用标准的C%2B%2B开发它，这样你就可以得到一些可移植的东西，而不是绑定到特定的图形用户界面框架上，这样你就可以在将来需要的时候很容易地把它移植到不同的框架上。|3897264|entityMap^0|G|7|1P|B|0|0|7|T|5|16|7|2P|5|0|W|7|23|7|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@$9|O|A|P|B|C]|$9|Q|A|R|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|S|8|@$9|T|A|U|B|C]|$9|V|A|W|B|C]|$9|X|A|Y|B|C]|$9|Z|A|10|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|11|8|@$9|12|A|13|B|C]|$9|14|A|15|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|16|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|L|3|-4|5|6|7|17|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|M|$]]

Since no answer mentioned it, Qt containers, including <code>QVector</code> generally have a fuller API, which does enable a certain amount of extra convenience and reduces verbosity when compared to <code>std::vector</code>.

<code>QVector</code> isn't really integrated into the Qt APIs, that role is taken by misfit <code>QList</code>, so it is not really a strong argument to use <code>QVector</code> for overall better compatibility with Qt APIs. Note that this might change for Qt 6, as the shortcomings of <code>QList</code> become more and more acknowledged.

That being said, if you already depend on Qt for your application, it would make good sense to use <code>QVector</code> for the convenience. I presume that nobody is going to add such a bloated dependency as Qt just for a container or two. <code>QVector</code> is efficient and a solid performer, and will run without problems on any platform, supported by Qt. 

On the other hand, if you want to make a core logic API that is framework agnostic, it would be a good idea to develop it in standard C++ if possible, so you get something portable that isn't tied to a particular GUI framework so you can easily migrate it to a different one in the future if you need to.

blocks|key|1826011|text|C%2B%2B的std::vector是跨平台的，因为它是C%2B%2B标准的一部分，每个与C%2B%2B兼容的编译器都必须提供它。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|1826012|我不熟悉Qt，但我确实看过这个in+the+docs|1826013|1826014|注意:这个类中的所有函数都是可重入的。|blockquote|1826015|1826016|1826017|也有可能(推测)+QVector类比std::vector更容易集成来容纳以Qt为中心的对象。再说一次，我不熟悉Qt，所以你必须自己做决定。|1826018|作为一个经验法则(有许多例外)，我倾向于使用std::vector，除非我有令人信服的理由使用某个特定于库的容器类。|1826019|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://doc.qt.nokia.com/latest/qvector.html^0|4|B|0|F|B|0|0|0|0|0|0|I|B|0|M|B|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Z|8|@$9|10|A|11|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|12|8|@]|D|@$9|13|A|14|1|15]]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|16|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|I|3|J|5|K|7|17|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|L|3|-4|5|6|7|18|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|M|3|-4|5|6|7|19|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|N|3|O|5|6|7|1A|8|@$9|1B|A|1C|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|P|3|Q|5|6|7|1D|8|@$9|1E|A|1F|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|R|3|-4|5|6|7|1G|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|S|$T|$5|U|V|W|E|$X|Y]]]]

C++'s <code>std::vector</code> is cross-platform because it is part of the C++ Standard. Every C++-conformant compiler must provide it.

I'm not familiar with Qt, but I did see this <a href="http://doc.qt.nokia.com/latest/qvector.html" rel="nofollow">in the docs</a>:

<blockquote>
 Note: All functions in this class are
 reentrant.
</blockquote>

It's also likely (speculation) that the QVector class is more easily integrated to hold Qt-centric objects than <code>std::vector</code> might be. Again, I'm not familiar with Qt so you have to decide for yourself.

As a rule of thumb (to which there are many exceptions), I would tend to use <code>std::vector</code> unless I had a compelling reason to use some library-specific container class.

I'm very new to C++ and Qt, but I'm very good at C#/Java.

The point is I like cross-platform, but I'm confuse with Qt. Isn't <code>std::vector</code> already cross-platform, doesn't Qt provide an equivalent to a non-crossplatform thing?

Also how are <code>File</code> and <code>QFile</code> different?

A link would be nice, thanks :)

Why use QVector(Qt) instead of std::vector

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

我对C++和Qt非常陌生，但我对C#/Java很在行。关键是我喜欢跨平台，但我对Qt感到困惑。std::vector不是已经跨平台了吗，Qt不是提供了等同于非跨平台的东西吗？另外，File和QFile有什么不同？链接会很好，谢谢:)

问为什么使用QVector(Qt)而不是std::vector
EN

回答 6

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问为什么使用QVector(Qt)而不是std::vectorEN

回答 6

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问为什么使用QVector(Qt)而不是std::vector
EN