> -----Original Message----- > From: Development <development-boun...@qt-project.org> On Behalf Of > Simon Hausmann
Please don't generalise where there is no general or even majority count (see below). > Am 26.02.20 um 13:42 schrieb Tor Arne Vestbø: > > We don’t need one rule to rule them all either. Many signals are named > fooChanged(), and can perfectly well stand on their own, without annotations. > Corner cases like "emit pressed();” can be annotated with Q_EMIT or a comment > to make it clearer what’s going on. Some end with "Changed". The overwhelming amount does not follow this rule and we won't change the naming for Qt 6 either. The naming convention merely states that there is a verb at the end. > This is also what tipped me over. We have stronger conventions nowadays with > property based APIs and the Changed suffix for the corresponding signals. > We'll > be fine without "emit" :-) Another case of generalisation where there is none. QML may have that notation but C++ doesn't. Now I don't know whether you plan to enforce such a rule for the new object property system but I would argue forcing every object property signal to end with "Changed" might be a bit too much. Last but not least, not every signal is associated to a property either. -- Alex > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development