When talking about properties and metadata.
I would like to see the same for signals and slots.
I use them to define my protocols, i have a dynamic qobject class on the
client and the real implementation on the server.
The protocol just swaps informations about the properties and
signals/slots and the dynamic qobject on the other side says it has the
same.
Internally it just makes network calls or react to network calls.
What i am missing was
additional informations for a signal/slot like a description i could add
for the api (self describing api is a wonderful thing)
an out of the box mechanism to add signals/slots to a qobject without
hacking my own dynamicqobject (it is not even fully working but good
enough right now).
informations for my client if he can call that specific slot based on
"security" settings.
Currently i wrote an additional system just adding all these
informations on top, but i always felt that i do twice the work where
moc is already doing most of it.
Greetings
Thomas
Am 01.06.2011 22:55, schrieb Andre Somers:
Op 1-6-2011 21:59, Jason H schreef:
Am I thinking too far outside the box?
Object Relation Mapping is an interesting topic, but it is not the
topic of this thread. There were other threads on this list already
covering that in more detail. I have some ideas on this lying around
myself, including extensions to QtSQL and a soft of moc compiler for
this. However, that is for a different discussion, and I doubt if
QObject should be at the core of that.
André
_______________________________________________
Qt5-feedback mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
_______________________________________________
Qt5-feedback mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
