> On 22 Dec 2023, at 13:20, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development > <development@qt-project.org> wrote: > > Il 22/12/23 11:15, André Somers ha scritto: >> I can see two options. The simplest option is to have a `radii` >> property, which is a grouped property containing the `topLeft`, >> `topRight`, `bottomLeft` and `bottomRight` properties as a floating >> point value as we have now. I think that would be cleaner than the >> current state of things. > > While at it, it should be aptly named `cornersRadii` or similar. > > `radius` has always violated Qt API guidelines. A rectangle doesn't have a > radius. We shouldn't be doing the same mistake again.
Radius is a well established term for this in Qt, and other UI frameworks. A key principle in Qt’s API design is familiarity and consistency. We can change the `radius` property from a qreal into a group property with left/rigth/top/bottom, similar to anchors. We can detect in the setRadius setter if the incoming argument is a real, and apply that to all of the corners. That would be backwards compatible, and give a more granular API for those that need it. Tor Arne -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
