On 10/3/11 5:29 PM, "ext Olivier Goffart" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Monday 03 October 2011 16:25:45 Lorn Potter wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Currently, there are 3 instances of QMetaObjectBuilder, in
>>QtDeclarative,
>> QtSystems (serviceframework) and QtSystems (publish and subscribe).
>>There
>> are only trivial changes between these existing versions of
>> QMetaObjectBuilder private class.
>> 
>> Any objections if I add a QMetaObjectBuilder to qtbase in qtcorelib, so
>>to
>> remove code duplication, (and I can use it as well)?
>> I will use the code from QtDeclarative module.
>> 
>> The respective owners of those modules/code should then probably remove
>> their versions and convert their code to using the one in QtBase.
>> 
>
>The reason why i don't like those is that it is really exposing a lot of
>the 
>internals, and that using them is complicated.
>A better alternative would be to have public API to do the things that we
>want. That is, something like
>QObject::addDynamicSignal(...)  QObject::addDynamicSlot() ... (and a
>dynamicslotevent), or whatever that api is used for.
>
>Now, if these classes stay private anyway, i don't object. (because
>reducing 
>code duplication is a good thing)

I would also prefer to keep it private to start with :)

But yes, let's reduce the code duplication and rather have one well tested
version.

Cheers,
Lars

>
>_______________________________________________
>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

Reply via email to