26.02.2020, 16:34, "Simon Hausmann" <simon.hausm...@qt.io>: > Am 26.02.20 um 13:42 schrieb Tor Arne Vestbø: >>> We’re neither enforcing the use of ‘emit’ currently. And I honestly find >>> most of the alternatives to be worse than no annotation at all. >> I agree. >> >> As others have argued, a signal is not special, in the sense that any >> function can do anything, including emitting signals, so annotating it >> doesn’t seem critical, as we apparently are fine without in all other cases. >> >> We don’t need one rule to rule them all either. Many signals are named >> fooChanged(), and can perfectly well stand on their own, without >> annotations. Corner cases like "emit pressed();” can be annotated with >> Q_EMIT or a comment to make it clearer what’s going on. > > This is also what tipped me over. We have stronger conventions nowadays > with property based APIs and the Changed suffix for the corresponding > signals. We'll be fine without "emit" :-)
FWIW, not all signals in world have corresponding properties. -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
