[Interest] Are slots even needed these days?

[Yves Bailly]

A use case for "old-style" slots is when you have dynamic connections, established at runtime
from some config file: you get the names of the signals and the slots as strings.
With the old style, your code can be as simple as
QObject::connect(foo, signal_name_string, bar, slot_name_string);

With the new style, you would have to manually map the strings to the function pointers, hence modifying the connection code each time a new signal or slot is added.

--
Yves Bailly
Software developer

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+yves.bailly=verosoftware.com at qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Nikos Chantziaras
> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 3:25 PM
> To: interest at qt-project.org
> Subject: [Interest] Are slots even needed these days?
> 
> Since in modern Qt you connect signals to functions/lambdas, is there a
> reason to declare slots anymore?
> 
> In other words, is there any difference between:
> 
>    class Foo: public QObject {
>        Q_OBJECT
> 
>    public slots:
>        void bar();
>    };
> 
> and:
> 
>    class Foo: public QObject {
>        Q_OBJECT
>    public:
> 
>        void bar();
>    };
> 
> I can connect to Foo::bar either way. If I don't intend to ever use the
> old-style connect syntax, is there a reason to have "public slots:"
> anymore?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest