On Fri, 29 Nov 2019 at 12:21, Sérgio Martins wrote:
>
> On 2019-11-29 08:15, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:52, Sérgio Martins via Development
> > wrote:
>
> (...)
> >> I suggest we rename such signals, as KDE is already doing for KF6
> >> (maybe
> >> leave the old signatu
On 2019-11-29 08:15, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:52, Sérgio Martins via Development
wrote:
(...)
I suggest we rename such signals, as KDE is already doing for KF6
(maybe
leave the old signatures there, to reduce Qt6 SIC)
There's also a new clazy check 'overloaded-signa
Hi,
On 29-11-19 09:15, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:52, Sérgio Martins via Development
wrote:
Hi,
The Qt5 PMF connect syntax is wonderful and very elegant compared to Qt
4.
Unless, ofc, you have overloaded signals, which makes it painful to
write and read. Not even qOve
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 17:52, Sérgio Martins via Development
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> The Qt5 PMF connect syntax is wonderful and very elegant compared to Qt
> 4.
> Unless, ofc, you have overloaded signals, which makes it painful to
> write and read. Not even qOverload makes it look much better.
>
>
>
Hi,
The Qt5 PMF connect syntax is wonderful and very elegant compared to Qt
4.
Unless, ofc, you have overloaded signals, which makes it painful to
write and read. Not even qOverload makes it look much better.
I suggest we rename such signals, as KDE is already doing for KF6 (maybe
leave th
