Of course it is not a bad idea to access siblings in a destructor. Why should it? If destruction follows in a known and reliable way there is no reason to avoid it. I do it to check some post-conditions using Q_ASSERT() to ensure all resources were freed and that involves some checks in siblings.
I wouldn't name another developer's solution a bad idea without knowing why the solution was chosen... Regards, Jochen Am Dienstag, den 12.06.2012, 23:14 +0200 schrieb Thiago Macieira: > On terça-feira, 12 de junho de 2012 21.36.46, Jochen Becher wrote: > > In my case childB is not a child of childA but both are children of > > parent (widgets in the same group/layout). But childB has a reference to > > childA which might be accessed in destructor. > > That's a whole different problem. Accessing siblings during destruction is a > bad idea by itself. > > There's only one thing worse than that: deleting a sibling. > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
