-----Original Message----- From: André Pönitz [mailto:apoen...@t-online.de] Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 4:22 PM To: Scott Aron Bloom Cc: Bob Hood; interest@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Interest] Are slots even needed these days?
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:02:17PM +0000, Scott Aron Bloom wrote: > I prefer “slotFoo” and “slotBar” as well as “sigFoo” and “sigBar” > > It really lets the methods stand out as slots and signals.. It also > means, don’t think “sender()” can ever valid if you are not in a “slotXYZ” > function. sender() is pretty much never needed needed with lambda connects, as the sender can be passed explicitly in the connect() call. This also removes the typical need to qobject_cast<> the sender, as the correct type is available directly. Andre' ========= Ahh.. good point.. Truth is, I have too many side projects stuck using the old method. However, I would still prefer the "slot" and "sig" prefix for clarity... _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
