[Development] QDoc can't ignore Q_PROPERTY

[andrew.den-exter at nokia.com]

> On 03/10/2012 07:32 PM, ext Andre Somers wrote:
> > Signals are often used outside the context of properties.
> 
> Signals yes, but NOTIFY signals?
> 
> This change only affects signals marked as NOTIFY in a Q_PROPERTY macro.

I think the point is there may be instances where a signal that is emitted incidentally when a property changes is used as the  notify signal for that property.   I get not wanting to be forced into writing redundant 'emitted when this property has changed' documentation  but excluding  documentation that has been written for a signal seems a bit excessive, wouldn't it be enough to just omit the warning for an undocumented signal if it's a notify signal?


Andrew

> 
> > I'm already not all that enthousiastic about not having the getters
> > and the setters documented explicitly*, and now people will have to
> > start looking at several places in the documentation to find out what
> > signals there are too.
> 
> This doesn't change the class overview. It only changes where links point to.
> 
> So you can still see that the class has members foo, setFoo and fooChanged
> but the links point to 1 place, the property documentation.
> 
> When you have a property, the getter, setter and notifier are
> implementation details that don't matter to the property user.
> 
> > I think there are even cases where a pair of getters&  setters is only
> > _documented_ as a property, but it is not defined as a Q_PROPERTY so
> > anyone trying to use them using the properties API is at a loss at why
> > that does not work...
> 
> You can't document members as a property without using Q_PROPERTY.
> 
> --
> Lincoln Ramsay - Senior Software Engineer Qt Development Frameworks,
> Nokia - http://qt.nokia.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development