On 22 Dec 2023, at 13:59, Lars Knoll <l...@knoll.priv.no> wrote:

You don't often get email from l...@knoll.priv.no<mailto:l...@knoll.priv.no>. 
Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>

On 22 Dec 2023, at 13:54, Tor Arne Vestbø via Development 
<development@qt-project.org> wrote:

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.

I’m not 100% sure about this. “Radius" without any pre/postfix is IMO somewhat 
confusing on a rectangle. HTML uses “borderRadius”, which I actually like quite 
a bit. And as it’s a new property, it would also not cause conflicts with the 
old name.

It’s not only affecting the border though, which can be a bit confusing 
perhaps? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/border-radius has an 
explicit note of that: "The radius applies to the whole background, even if the 
element has no border;”.

Tor Arne
-- 
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to