<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Boudewijn Rempt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:boud@valdyas.org">boud@valdyas.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="h5">On Saturday 13 March 2010, Sven Langkamp wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> when looking at the recent changes to use the new slider I found several<br>
> places where is wasn't used correctly. (using the integer methods that does<br>
> consider the factor)<br>
> Therefor I propose the api changed in the attached patch. By not longer<br>
> inheriting from QAbstractSlider it hides the internal api.<br>
><br>
> That way we can still use the current value/setValue and valueChanged<br>
> signal.<br>
><br>
> When changing a slider the signal connection needs to be checked, because<br>
> the old slider often had different parameter there.<br>
> I know it's a bit stupid to change it now, but it reduces the risk of using<br>
> the api in the wrong way.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Does this make it impossible to use the slider for integer values? We have a<br>
number of places where we use integers, like opacity etc.<br></blockquote><div> <br>Not impossible, you could set decimals to 0 and round the resulting values.<br>If we don't make the change than you have to be careful to use the right method.<br>
At the moment e.g. the gradient tool threshold is broken because of that.<br></div></div>