On 01/03/13 19:54, André Somers wrote: > Op 1-3-2013 10:22, Иван Комиссаров schreef: >> I don't think it's a good idea to try to fix QStorageInfo. >> >> The main argument is that QStorageInfo is a monitor+info provider, but >> monitor should depend on a DBus in Linux; however info provider >> doesn't require that. Also, monitor requires internal thread on Mac. >> My point is that in many cases, when you doesn't need monitor itself, >> it's too heavy to create such a huge object just to receive volume info. > I don't find that a convincing argument. The implementation could be > such, that the heavy machinery is only instantiated when somebody > actually connects to the monitoring signals. We have connectNotify and > disconnectNotify available for that in QObject.
It already uses those classes. > >> >> That's why i separated my solution into 2 different classes; so >> QtDriveInfo doesn't require external dependencies, like DBus. > I think I would prefer to have the controls and notification signals > directly on the QDriveInfo class itself. That seems to be more > consistent with the rest of the Qt API, where I can't think of other > examples of a separate controller class. > > >> >> Next, QStorageInfo notification doesn't work for MingGW and Windows CE. >> >> Also QStorageInfo doesn't have internal caching. >> > I am not saying that I think your classes look bad in any way. In fact, > I think they look pretty neat! > I do have my doubts about the refresh() method. Isn't there any way to > automatically refresh without getting it too expensive? > > Thanks for your efforts so far! > > André > > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > -- Lorn Potter Senior Software Engineer, QtSensors/QtSensorGestures/QtSystemInfo _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
