On 7/19/12 4:45 PM, "ext Girish Ramakrishnan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 7:16 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 7/16/12 12:43 PM, "ext Stephen Kelly" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>On Sunday, July 15, 2012 14:24:18 Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:53:33AM +0200, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>>> > We have only two choices: >>>> > >>>> > 1) make QWindowSystemInterface a proper, public API class >>>> >>>> I think QWindowSystemInterface in its current form would be >>>> a rather incomplete and limited API. >>> >>>The point you have to keep in mind is that it can be extended: There are >>>no >>>virtual methods on it, and no reason to add any, and it doesn't have a >>>virtual >>>destructor, so it is not designed to be subclassed (actually it should >>>be >>>a >>>namespace instead of a class). >>> >>>So whether the API doesn't offer enough for you is beside the point - >>>the >>>point (and the problem) is that it appears in public headers. >> >> Yes, and we should fix that. QTestLib uses three methods from QWSI. That >> doesn't sound like a good enough reason to make around 30 methods >>public. >> >> The class in it's current state is somewhat messy, and we might want to >>or >> need to change the signatures of methods in there in the future. >> > >https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,30541 is actually >integrating. Do you want us to revert it? I talked this through with Paul here, and we both agree that QWSI shouldn't be public. > >The alternate solution was: >https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,30643. Hacky, but prevents >QWSI from appearing as a public header. How about a third solution, that only exposes the three methods that are being used by QTestLib? We could turn QWSI into a namespace, and forward declare the required methods in qtestkeyboard.h etc. Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
