So - are you suggesting that Qt file-system monitoring facilities should actually generate an in-memory snapshot of the necessary directory tree(s) for platforms that need it (in this case Mac OSX <= Snow Leopard) ?
Hey I'm not against, it would be really easy to implement. But you should really try testing something like this yourself on your computer first. It's /really/ memory consuming as well as /really/ time consuming for large trees of stuff, fairly common nowadays in anyone's photo/music/video/doc etc. collection. Sure we can alleviate the time-consuming part with a worker thread, but I'm telling you this is quite a hunk of resources you're signing off Qt to consume for a possibly large percentage of use cases (many many people out there have <= Snow Leopard). BTW d3fault are you on IRC? What's your handle & timezone, maybe we can chat about this more. -regedit P.S. Just on a personal note, the reason I got caught up in all this to begin with was some application I wanted to develop. My particular project involves a snapshot of the file system anyway, so in my particular case on MacOSX<=Snow Leopard I would definitely just obtain directory-level information from FSEvents and proceed to compare the directory's contents with that of my existing snapshot. In fact if Qt is gonna do a whole in-memory snapshot as d3fault suggests for this situation, I'm considering dropping this whole QFSW campaign and just roll out my own solution :) How about we offer a choice to the programmer whether they want Qt to do the internal snapshot (perhaps the default) or not? _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
