> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2019 at 11:58 AM > From: "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Enum classes in signals? > > On Tuesday, 5 February 2019 08:43:03 PST Jason H wrote: > > While I prefer enum classes myself, I just had to connect to a signal with > > one in it. This was unfortunate as I was attempting to use the old > > connection syntax SIGNAL()/SLOT() macros. I was not aware that the old > > syntax were being deprecated? What is the policy on this? > > They're not exactly deprecated, but they're older than the new syntax and > they > don't check at compile time that the connection can succeed. > > > Should signals not use enum classes? > > Unknown. I don't see why they shouldn't, but you haven't shared any error > messages, so I can't tell. > > > Should Qt not use enum classes? > > Enum classes are fine in Qt. > > > Should Qt support old connection syntax? Where/when? > > Yes. It should be supported for the millions of lines of code that existed > before the new syntax was introduced in 2012. > > > Should all new connections be in the modern syntax? > > Yes, if you can.
Great thanks for clarifying that. I use Qt principals in my own application code (they tend to be the best - well reasoned at least). So if there was something that I hadn't considered, I'd want to take that into account and avoid any gotchas down the road. I just started using enum classes myself. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
