Hi,
>
> it's a bit weird that you need a qmldir for that. Wouldn't it be better if we
> could mark this as singleton in the implementation (ie. inside single.qml)?
> Maybe use a new keyword for that? static is already a reserved keyword in
> Ecmascript 5.1, so we could maybe write single.qml as:
>
> static QtObject {
> property int myproperty;
> ...
> }
But how would the engine know about single.qml being static? AFAIK all
.qml parsing is done on demand. The engine would have to know that
single.qml is a singleton from another source (Or scan all .qml files
upfront for the static keyword).
Another approach could be having something like a Singleton.qml in the
plugin.
Singleton.qml would be the general entry point to instantiate QML
singletons for a plugin.
Singleton.qml
Singletons {
MySingleton01 {
id: mySingleton01
}
MySingleton02 {
id: mySingleton02
}
QtObject {
id: mySingleton03
}
...
}
Everything defined in Singletons would be instantiated once in the root
context.
Kind Regards,
Thomas Hartmann
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
