[Patch] Re: KDockWidget'S
crossfire at babylon2k.de
Tue Sep 10 21:49:11 BST 2002
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tuesday 10 September 2002 21:50, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 19:38, Andreas Zehender wrote:
> > Hi!
> > On Tuesday 10 September 2002 19:12, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > > I guess we need a new rule in the keep-BC paper, saying that classes
> > > willing to stay BC shouldn't have inline destructor.
> > >
> > > You can destroy the private data by inheriting class
> > > KDockWidgetHeader::KDockWidgetHeaderPrivate from QObject and passing
> > > the KDockWidgetHeader instance that created it as its parent (so it
> > > will delete it automatically). *shrug*
> > >
> > > BTW, if you want, you can just use KDockWidgetHeaderPrivate instead of
> > > KDockWidgetHeader::KDockWidgetHeaderPrivate , if you move the forward
> > > declaration out of the class (lazy people ... including me :-/ ). It
> > > won't break BC, the 'd' member is just a pointer.
> > This new patch fixes the inline constructor issue and should be now fully
> > binary conpatible.
> > Can I commit?
> Have no probs with your stuff, but why does we need a undock button ?
> Shouldn't we make it the qdockwidget style to undock on double click on the
> drag handle ? (And dock back by double click, too)
> Would than be in sync with the rest of kde (as toolbars, qdockwidgets, ...)
Have commited my double click behaviour fix.
Christoph "Crossfire" Cullmann
cullmann at kde.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the kde-core-devel