On Friday, July 13, 2012 08:33:42 Girish Ramakrishnan wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Olivier Goffart <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday 11 July 2012 18:50:15 Stephen Kelly wrote: > >> So, either the code should stay as is - leaving the signals private > >> and > >> making function pointer connects not work, or the patches should be > >> applied, making function pointer connects work. > >> > >> Making the signals public is not an option for me. > > > > I personally beleive allowing the new syntax is more important than > > keeping those signal private. > > Anyway, i'm quite happy with the current implementation in moc. > > Is this really important given that we are in feature freeze? Changes > to moc, however small, is not advisable at all.
This wasn't a new feature. It was fixing an existing feature, and the fix couldn't wait for Qt 5.1. We only found out about this issue because someone evaluating Qt 5 told us about it a week ago on IRC. I haven't seen the IRC handle before or since, so this was the kind of person who would give us feedback on a beta for example. We will probably get more such feedback once the beta is released (I hope we will anyway - I'm glad we found out about this issue now and not a week before 5.0 release), and we need to be able to fix issues like that which can't be fixed after 5.0. Otherwise there would be no point in the beta at all. Thanks, -- Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
