<table><tr><td style="">hpereiradacosta added a comment.
</td><a style="text-decoration: none; padding: 4px 8px; margin: 0 8px 8px; float: right; color: #464C5C; font-weight: bold; border-radius: 3px; background-color: #F7F7F9; background-image: linear-gradient(to bottom,#fff,#f1f0f1); display: inline-block; border: 1px solid rgba(71,87,120,.2);" href="https://phabricator.kde.org/D3240" rel="noreferrer">View Revision</a></tr></table><br /><div><div>
<blockquote style="border-left: 3px solid #a7b5bf; color: #464c5c; font-style: italic; margin: 4px 0 12px 0; padding: 4px 12px; background-color: #f8f9fc;"><p>For the general case you are right. Unpolish is only called from QApplication::setStyle when the old style gets destroyed. On Application tear-down it's not called.</p></blockquote>
<p>To be honest, I am a bit uneasy about this change. Sounds somewhat like abusing the API (since you then call the method explicitly in kwin). What if people later on start adding other "destruction" stuff in unpolish, unaware that it is actually not called ?</p>
<p>Maybe something cleaner would be to move everything from the destructor to unpolish (with proper reassignment to nullptr), and then call unpolish explicitely in the destructor.<br />
The whole thing with tons of comments/warning ?</p></div></div><br /><div><strong>REPOSITORY</strong><div><div>rBREEZE Breeze</div></div></div><br /><div><strong>REVISION DETAIL</strong><div><a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/D3240" rel="noreferrer">https://phabricator.kde.org/D3240</a></div></div><br /><div><strong>EMAIL PREFERENCES</strong><div><a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/" rel="noreferrer">https://phabricator.kde.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/</a></div></div><br /><div><strong>To: </strong>graesslin, Plasma, broulik, hpereiradacosta<br /><strong>Cc: </strong>plasma-devel, lesliezhai, ali-mohamed, jensreuterberg, abetts, sebas<br /></div>