On Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:09:16 K. Frank wrote: > If we take the attitude that the lack of documentation of which > property is the USER property means that this is not part of the > official public interface of the class and is a mere implementation > detail that can be changed willy-nilly in the future, then a new > version of Qt would be allowed to break my (beautiful) code.
This was changed in Qt 4.8 https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,31035 > > The USER property feels like part of a QObject's public interface > and therefore ought to be documented (and stable). I agree. Like all changes, the impact on users of Qt needs to be evaluated. Thanks, -- Stephen Kelly <stephen.ke...@kdab.com> | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
