07.12.2018, 19:21, "Jason H" <[email protected]>:
> That guy has some great stuff. Would like to see it included. He's expressed 
> no concern over Qt integrating his stuff.

I'm afraid that author expressing no concern is not enough for integration of 
code under custom license into Qt

>
>>  Sent: Friday, December 07, 2018 at 8:03 AM
>>  From: "Fabrice Mousset | GEOCEPT GmbH" <[email protected]>
>>  To: "'Jérôme Godbout'" <[email protected]>, "Konstantin Tokarev" 
>> <[email protected]>, "Tomasz Siekierda" <[email protected]>, 
>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>  Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>  Subject: Re: [Interest] Better Q_PROPERTY() ?
>>
>>  Hi all,
>>
>>  I have found a little project which I found very nice to use especially if 
>> you want expose you C++ class to QML.
>>  Take a look at this project developed by Thomas Boutroue
>>  http://gitlab.unique-conception.org/qt-qml-tricks/qt-supermacros
>>  and
>>  http://gitlab.unique-conception.org/qt-qml-tricks/qt-qml-models
>>
>>  Here is the link to the Lightning Talk he had at QtWS15 in Berlin.
>>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96XAaH97XYo
>>
>>  I use this tools in my Qt/QML application, and it saves me so much time!
>>
>>  Regards
>>
>>  Fabrice
>>
>>  > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>  > Von: Interest <[email protected]> Im Auftrag von 
>> Jérôme
>>  > Godbout
>>  > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2018 18:50
>>  > An: Konstantin Tokarev <[email protected]>; Tomasz Siekierda
>>  > <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>  > Cc: [email protected]
>>  > Betreff: Re: [Interest] Better Q_PROPERTY() ?
>>  >
>>  > I agree a much simpler macro Q_PROPERTY with a type and an argument
>>  > name would be nice addition Q_PROPERTY_RWN(proptype, arg) -->
>>  > Q_PROPERTY(proptype arg READ arg WRITE setArg NOTIFY argChanged)
>>  > R: for the READ part
>>  > W: for the write part
>>  > N: notify part
>>  > C: constant part
>>  >
>>  > Would need to make all the derivated
>>  > Q_PROPERTY_RWN
>>  > Q_PROPERTY_RC
>>  > Q_PROPERTY_RN
>>  > ...
>>  > That would stream line the naming for most value. Still can use the
>>  > Q_PROPERTY() when something different come along.
>>  >
>>  > For the getter/setter function could have a simple macro but this is 
>> tricky if you
>>  > use pimpl or anything else.
>>  > This seem more per people, but not too
>>  >
>>  > -----Original Message-----
>>  > From: Interest <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
>> Konstantin
>>  > Tokarev
>>  > Sent: December 6, 2018 11:03 AM
>>  > To: Tomasz Siekierda <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>  > Cc: [email protected]
>>  > Subject: Re: [Interest] Better Q_PROPERTY() ?
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > 05.12.2018, 23:31, "Tomasz Siekierda" <[email protected]>:
>>  > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 18:23, Sérgio Martins via Interest
>>  > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>>  > >>  On 2018-12-05 16:41, Jason H wrote:
>>  > >>  > Epanding to:
>>  > >>  > private:
>>  > >>  > T _N;
>>  > >>  > public:
>>  > >>  > T N() { return _N; }
>>  > >>  > void setN(T N) { if (_N != N) { M = N; emit NChanged(N); } }
>>  > >>  > signal:
>>  > >>  > void NChanged(T N);
>>  > >>  >
>>  > >>  > I know this might sound trivial but if I'm making 5 classes each
>>  > >> with
>>  > >>  > 10 properties, that's 1500 lines of boilerplate code that I'm
>>  > >> writing
>>  > >>  > (with code style applied).
>>  > >>  >
>>  > >>  > Is there any way to get closer to my ideal?
>>  > >>
>>  > >>  The problem with auto-generated setters is that sometimes you'll
>>  > >> want to
>>  > >>  modify them to do additional stuff.
>>  > >
>>  > > Actually, I think this is not a problem at all if we keep current
>>  > > Q_PROPERTY. Then, if you have some special case, you'd use Q_PROPERTY
>>  > > and manually implement getters and setters. If you have a standard
>>  > > case (like most of the
>>  > > time) you'd use
>>  > > the new declaration (like Q_PROPERTY_AUTO or whatever).
>>  > >
>>  > > You could say it's a bit similar to new and old connect() syntax. We
>>  > > don't need to choose one - we can have both.
>>  >
>>  > I'm strongly opposed to autogeneration of getters and setters, because 
>> this is
>>  > far from being "standard case", except the most trivial situations, 
>> however it
>>  > would be great if it was possible to avoid duplication of property name 
>> inside
>>  > Q_PROPERTY for getter, setter and signal, and instead use naming 
>> convention
>>  > (property, setProperty, propertyChanged)
>>  >
>>  > >
>>  > >>  If you're using QtCreator then Q_PROPERTY will be auto-completed and
>>  > >> you
>>  > >>  just need to write the property name.
>>  > >>
>>  > >>  Then, right click -> refactor -> "Generate missing Q_PROPERTY 
>> members".
>>  > >>  (which generates the member bodies in the header file unfortunately,
>>  > >>  https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTCREATORBUG-14622).
>>  > >>
>>  > >>  Maybe we need a "Qt language server", so all other editors would
>>  > >> benefit
>>  > >>  from such refactorings.
>>  > >>
>>  > >>  Regards,
>>  > >>  --
>>  > >>  Sérgio Martins | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer
>>  > >>  Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company
>>  > >>  Tel: Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322)
>>  > >>  KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
>>  > >>  _______________________________________________
>>  > >>  Interest mailing list
>>  > >>  [email protected]
>>  > >>  https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>  > >
>>  > > _______________________________________________
>>  > > Interest mailing list
>>  > > [email protected]
>>  > > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>  >
>>  > --
>>  > Regards,
>>  > Konstantin
>>  >
>>  > _______________________________________________
>>  > Interest mailing list
>>  > [email protected]
>>  > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>  > _______________________________________________
>>  > Interest mailing list
>>  > [email protected]
>>  > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Interest mailing list
>>  [email protected]
>>  https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin

_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Reply via email to