On 24 Sep 2014, at 3:57 pm, Simon Hausmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > I wonder if the"int interface" indexed API is tedious to use. Say you do > manage to get a QNetworkInterface object from QtNetwork, then before you can > call for example > > QString imsi(int interface) const; > > you have to retrieve the index() from the network interface first. It feels > like a very procedural API.
Yes, it is tedious and a bit odd to me, and is one thing I do not like about it. A lot of those don't have anything to do with any particular network interface. It wasn't this way in QtMobility, I wasn't on the team that ported this to Qt 5, so I am not sure of the reasoning of it. > Half of the "getters" would IMO be a nicer fit if they were part of the > QNetworkInterface API. Then they would make for a really nice property based > API - and we just may have to delegate some functionality into plugins > implementation wise? > > When it comes to the notification signals I also wonder if it would be better > to have a QNetworkInterfaceMonitor alike class in QtNetwork that supplies the > notifications (for an interface mask perhaps). > > > From a 10000 feet Qt as a product point of view, it's not evident why this > API > belongs into a separate module instead of simply into the Qt network module. I agree. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
