On Tuesday 04 October 2011 10:03:12 Gábor Lehel wrote: > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:58 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: [email protected] > >>[mailto:[email protected]] On > >>Behalf Of Knoll Lars (Nokia-MP-Qt/Oslo) > >> > >>>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. > >> > > I believe Lorn just forgot to mention this tiny little detail.... Yes, > > it's only going to be a private export. > > If this is what I think it is and what it looks like it is, I wouldn't > be surprised if it were reimplemented a few times again in various > language bindings. (I would be a lot more surprised if it weren't). > Having it publicly available might be useful.
Yes, e.g. PySide has it's own dynamic metaobject implementation, a public API to create/destroy dynamic signals/slots would be great for all language bindings. -- Hugo Parente Lima INdT - Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
