There are no technical limitations, and it will be kept. I expect the fix will 
be fairly simple.

But it sounds like you're asking for a better search mechanism.

________________________________________
From: André Hartmann <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 9:19:07 AM
To: Martin Smith; Konstantin Shegunov
Cc: Qt development mailing list
Subject: Re: [Development] Missing documentation in Qt 5.12

Hi Martin,

the all-members list is very useful to get an overview about a class.
You're searching for a function to perform a specific task, that you
assume to be in a class. Searching through all inherited classes is a
tedious task.

If there are no technical limitations, I'm for keeping the all-members list.

André

Am 18.12.18 um 08:39 schrieb Martin Smith:
> I'll argue with you about it being a p1. If the problem is confined to the 
> all-members list, it's not a p1 problem because the information is still 
> there via the inherits links, which are more useful for seeing what is 
> inherited anyway. My own opinion is that the all-members list should be 
> removed.
>
> martin
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Konstantin Shegunov <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 11:03:50 PM
> To: Martin Smith
> Cc: Sze Howe Koh; Qt development mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Development] Missing documentation in Qt 5.12
>
> Not only are members missing, but links lead noplace. For example in the 
> mentioned page metaObject() goes to 
> http://doc.qt.io/qt-5.12/qwidget.html#metaObject which naturally doesn't 
> exist. From what I can tell nothing that is inherited, beside the things 
> explicitly overriden, appear in the list. Although I wouldn't presume to 
> place fault, for me the bad impression was left not by the bug itself, which 
> is pretty embarrassing, as so much as bouncing it around on the tracker for 
> 10 days until ultimately a ping on the list prompted action ... I mean, we 
> get it, there's not enough people and hours to handle all the bugs, but I 
> *hope* it is not going to be necessary to bring P1s to the list so at least 
> they get attention ...
>
> Disclaimer: I had conversed with Sze-Howe about this bugreport before he 
> started this thread.
>
> Nitpick: Between 5.10 and 5.11 we magically got qt_metacall and qt_metacast 
> (expanded out of Q_OBJECT) into the members list and of course the links are 
> broken, but this listing of private(-use) members is long-standing (from Qt 
> 4); although I'm pretty sure these are not intended to be employed by the 
> users and they're never going to get a proper documentation page.
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
>
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to