> On Friday, October 07, 2011, Tom Breton (Tehom) wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the advice. But Qt wants all "tr" calls anchored in some
>> Qt-derived class. There is no bare "tr" call. So having moved them
>> into
>> new classes, any direction I go has an impact.
>
> Qt says it wants, or your code refuses to compile with plain tr() calls?
> That's a level of subtlety I missed the first time through.
Refused to compile (past tense, it's compiling now with
EventParameterDialog::tr). QObject::tr works too. I think any QObject
derived class will do.
Sometimes I anthropomorphize libraries and other software. They "want"
things or "expect" things, they even "hope" and "fear". It's just a
verbal shorthand I use for their design intentions.
I have another question about the header/cpp policy. Should even nested
classes go into their own header/cpp files? Like
Composition::ReferenceSegment.
Tom Breton (Tehom)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
