On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:40 AM, André Somers <an...@familiesomers.nl> wrote: > Op 26-9-2012 9:32, d3fault schreef: >> I don't have a git clone and gerrit set up atm otherwise I'd submit >> it. Can someone else do it for me? > Well, this sounds like a fine time to get such a setup then? >> And another semi-OT question relating to documentation: how are we >> synchronizing wiki edits of the documentation with the git copies? >> Seeing as the documentation lives in the .cpp files, automatic >> synchronization sounds... uhhh... difficult. > Simple: it is not. That is unfortunate, since there is valuable content > in the docnotes (I assume that's what you mean with 'wiki edits of the > documentation'). >
I need to lay off the crack. I must have hallucinated "edit" buttons on the docs on qt-project.org/docs/ sometime in the past (or maybe it was the nokia.com days). I thought qdoc (with a flag or similar tool) was populating a wiki database with every release or something. But yes, the docnotes are important too! re: Below. tl;dr: clarifications in docs between QProcess and underlying process, especially with respect to being finished. And now I'm wondering if there are still scenarios where users might get confused when using waitForFinished(). When using QProcess without an event loop, wouldn't wait for finished always return true even if the expected result is false (that it already finished)? Scenario: ...programming without an event loop (lol)... QProcess proc; proc.start(aSmallAndFastBinaryAgain); // /bin/echo test , for example //lots of other lines here, taking lots of time. maybe modal dialogs etc etc bool finished = proc.waitForFinished(); //they would expect it to be false after reading the documentation and getting confused between QProcess and the underlying process //since we aren't using an event loop, QProcess never has the chance to mark itself as finished. A user might think that since so much stuff has happened (modal dialogs especially) in between that it would be improbable that the process had NOT finished. They would be wrong because QProcess never had the chance to update itself as being finished (no event loop). Proposed solutions: bool isFinished() which checks the underlying process without needing an event loop Or: A start/waitForFinished stack of sorts (haven't thought this design through, see below) so that for every start(), a subsequent call to waitForFinished() will always return true (but only once -- and obviously I'm ignoring the error cases where it should return false)... regardless of if it is called with an event loop or not. Would probably break existing code however :-/ (if using an event loop and you give control back to the event loop so QProcess can mark itself finished, a later call to waitForFinished returns false. After this fix it would return true and thus break existing code). I don't care too much about this because I am not programming without an event loop... but I thought it was at least worth mentioning. This is probably a waste of an email but maybe someone will read and benefit from it years from now. d3fault _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development