Hi
Viktor Szakáts wrote: > >> I am thinking of separate GC destructor. >> However I would like to experiment with "type" field, what is this >> and how it will behave? Some small code snippet will be handy. > > IMO this would make the code monolithic, so it would indeed > be a (very) bad idea. Using the "type" method you'd have one > central release routine which calls _all_ destructors depending > on object type. > > This in practice means that any HBQT based apps would have to > link in the *all* QT classes in final executable. Thus causing > significant bloat. > > It's better to simply have them separately, and it's also much > better fits to current code layout. It also makes it easier to > debug. > Not exactly. The if statement will be like this if object == QObject ( 97% of Qt, may be more ) else if object == QSize else if object == QPoint Only very few are left, may be 20 at the most, and all are used extensively in hbxbp.lib. I ran into difficulties when I tried to write for each class. Actually I had started like that but ended with what you see in the zipped code. Regards Pritpal Bedi -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HBQT---HBXBP-%3A-Garbage-Collection-tp25813841p25866075.html Sent from the Harbour - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
