Richard_Dale at tipitina.demon.co.uk
Fri Jun 9 16:29:19 UTC 2006
On Friday 09 June 2006 14:57, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
> On Thursday 08 June 2006 17:18, Paolo Capriotti wrote:
> > This is great! We do have to polish the interface a little bit, but
> > the hardest work is done.
> BTW, I passed along this great news to the guys hanging around in the #mono
> channel on IRC. While it was generally praised, there was some criticism of
> not using the C# event feature.
Do events use delegates? That is quite similar to the QObject::eventFilter()
functionality, so the best way of handling it might be to add delegate calls
to eventFilter(). That sort of thing needs more thinking about, and obviously
suggestions from C# experts would be welcome.
It would be nice to use delegates and '+=' operators to do connections too,
but the first thing to be done is to get an api working which is a similar to
the C++ one as possible.
> Is the SIGNAL/SLOT system used to maintain compatibility with the existing
> Qt docs? How hard will it be to get the C++ method signature to be optional
> (might help with making the code samples prettier)?
I think we would assume a QWidget as an argument to a qyoto slot would be
a 'const QWidget&' in C++. Or a string would be a 'const QString&', and not a
QByteArray, 'QString*' etc. So if you wanted to use other types like
pointers, you would still need to specify the C++ type signature. The C++
type signatures are used for constructing a QMetaObject, which is used when
doing slot/signal connections. It is hard to allow for runtime type
resolution with that scheme, as it would involve retrospectively changing the
More information about the Kde-bindings