On Monday, 24 March 2025 03:06:51 Pacific Daylight Time Schimkowitsch Robert
wrote:
> Wild idea: Could I utilize C++26 reflection to generate the necessary
> getters, setters and signals in a way that moc could see? Unfortunately I
> doubt it...
We haven't begun looking into it, but we think C++2
Sorry, wrong link. This is correct one:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtreleasenotes/+/633617
* Jani
From: Development On Behalf Of Jani
Heikkinen via Development
Sent: maanantai 24. maaliskuuta 2025 7.56
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] HEADS-UP: Qt 6.8.3 re
What's the benefit of not generating it on the C++ level? I mean, I
understand you _can_ do that, but I don't quite see why you would prefer
to introduce an inconsistency like that?
QML will need a notification signal if we remove support for bindables
and Robert wants to search-replace his pr
On 2025-03-24, Ulf Hermann via Development wrote:
> Q_DEFAULT_PROPERTY(int, value)
>
> That would expand to:
The amount of custom macros like that I have removed is quite big.
Programers are lazy. They will also use that macro for readonly
properties, and constant properties.
/Sune
--
Develo
On 3/24/25 10:58, Ulf Hermann via Development wrote:
Whatever you change, please consider the upgrade path for people
using BINDABLE in many, many places.
E.g. if a new solution can be applied by regexp search & replace, or
if Qt Creator offered an "upgrade fix" via light bulb, that would be
g
> Why all the ceremony? What people probably want is:
>
> Q_DEFAULT_PROPERTY(int, value)
>
> That would expand to:
>
> Q_PROPERTY(int value READ value WRITE setValue NOTIFY valueChanged)
> public:
> int value() const { return m_value; }
> void setValue(int value)
> ...
...which
Whatever you change, please consider the upgrade path for people using BINDABLE
in many, many places.
E.g. if a new solution can be applied by regexp search & replace, or if Qt Creator
offered an "upgrade fix" via light bulb, that would be great.
We need to establish some "NOTIFY default" as p
Q_PROPERTY_FULL(int, READ int value() noexcept,
WRITE void setValue(int),
NOTIFY void valueChanged())
Why all the ceremony? What people probably want is:
Q_DEFAULT_PROPERTY(int, value)
That would expand to:
Q_PROPERTY(int value READ value WRI
