Hi Arno, Thanks for the feedback.
I have personally never needed more than the TreeItem class from the examples I referred to. I have worked on various trees on the GUI. Apologies, perhaps, I have not made my inquiry clear. This is not calling for opinions about TreeItem vs. QStandardItem vs. QTreeWidgetItem. I mentioned a very specific class, where QTreeWidgetItem would seemingly suffice for the simple and editable tree example. I was asking about the use of those for these particular examples, not for everything. So, my question still stands for the context of these two examples: can the outcome of these examples be the same with QTreeWidgetItem? If the answer is no, we are done. If the answer is yes, I would say, it is not a good example to show their reinvention. In this case, I would either change the logic of the examples to truly demonstrate something that cannot be done with a QTreeWidgetItem, or just use that for this particular example. So, just to summarise, I did not mean to launch a generic question about custom tree items vs. built-in tree items Qt. I was referring to this very specific use case. Perhaps, your application and use cases are different from the simple and editable examples, so the built-in items would not suffice your use case. However, I am asking about the examples, not your use cases. Hope that clarifies the context of my inquiry a bit more. Thanks for the feedback. On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 3:44 PM Arno Rehn <a.r...@menlosystems.com> wrote: > Hey Lazlo, > > I've been working with various list and tree models a lot in recent > years. I think I've never used QTreeWidgetItem and/or QStandardItem even > once. > In my experience these classes or only viable for the most simple cases. > I'd usually expect people to need a custom data structure holding their > model data and the "standard" classes will not suffice. With that in > mind, I think it's fine that the examples show just that. > > Regards, > Arno > > Am 21.11.2023 um 16:31 schrieb Laszlo Papp: > > Hi, > > > > The tree model examples seem to invent a custom tree item. > > > > Simple: > > https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qtwidgets-itemviews-simpletreemodel-example.html > > Edit: > > > https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qtwidgets-itemviews-editabletreemodel-example.html > > > > at > > > > > https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtbase.git/tree/examples/widgets/itemviews/simpletreemodel/treeitem.h?h=6.6 > > > > and > > > > > https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtbase.git/tree/examples/widgets/itemviews/editabletreemodel/treeitem.h?h=6.6 > > > > --- > > > > Long time ago, I based my projects on these examples, inventing > > (copying and pasting) these tree items. > > > > I wonder whether these examples could instead propagate the use of: > > > > 1. QTreeWidgetItem? > > 2. QStandardItem? > > > > It seems that e.g. the QTreeWidgetItem is nearly the same as the Tree > > Item invented in those examples. So, why reinvent? > > > > Do you think that the tree item still has a good use case to exist in > > those examples? > > > > If yes, what is it? > > > > If not, could we start propagating QTreeWidgetItem or QStandardItem in > > those examples instead to avoid reinventing? > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > Kind regards, > > László > > > > -- > Arno Rehn > Tel +49 89 189 166 0 > Fax +49 89 189 166 111 > a.r...@menlosystems.com > www.menlosystems.com > > Menlo Systems GmbH > Bunsenstrasse 5, D-82152 Martinsried, Germany > Amtsgericht München HRB 138145 > Geschäftsführung: Dr. Michael Mei, Dr. Ronald Holzwarth > USt.-IdNr. DE217772017, St.-Nr. 14316170324 > > -- > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >
-- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
