[Development] Proposal to change connectSlotsByName behavior

Thiago Macieira thiago.macieira at intel.com
Fri Dec 4 03:00:15 CET 2015

On Friday 04 December 2015 00:27:09 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> I don't think it will break too many applications because anyone who was
> relying on the order of instentiation for that has just its application
> working out of pure luck. (And i'm pretty sure that your proposal is always
> the intended behaviour)

Note that for widgets, the order is not pure luck. The order of children of a 
QWidget implies the tabbing order. Therefore, it is usually well-defined.

I don't mind changing the order, as long as there's a consensus in the mailing 

If we do decide to change the order, I have a follow-up question:
 do we change it only in connectSlotsByName, or do we change 
 QObject::findChildren to reflect the new order?

Right now, connectSlotsByName simply uses findChildren's order. If we decide to 
change the order in one but not the order, I'd like to hear a compelling 
reason why it's ok for them be different.

> Other possibilities may include:
>  - Connect signals of both objects.  (Probably not a good idea since it does
> make it even more confusing)

Agreed that this is not a good idea. Let's discard it.

>  - Throw a warning if there are two objects with the same name.

This is orthogonal.
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

More information about the Development mailing list