[Interest] A suggestion about replacing signals, actions and slots

[Thiago Macieira]

On sexta-feira, 28 de dezembro de 2012 15.16.41, André Somers wrote:
> Op 28-12-2012 14:23, Scott Aron Bloom schreef:
> > Has anyone brought up the property system that MOC provides as well? 
> > Maybe I missed it...
> Well, yeah. In my first reply, I said (in general):
> > Second, moc and Q_OBJECT does a
> > good deal more than just dealing with signals and slots.
> 
> That includes properties, introspection needed for scripts and whatnot
> 
> :-) But as the original focussed on signals and slots, I focussed on
> 
> that aspect as well.

See also: http://www.macieira.org/blog/2011/09/the-future-of-moc/. Especially 
the part "But we still need moc", where it reads:

"What’s more, the most important reason why we need moc is not related to the 
signals and slots."

If you want more info on why we can't use PMFs, see my comment:
http://www.macieira.org/blog/2011/09/the-future-of-moc/#comment-120

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20121228/de8390c7/attachment.sig>