Review Request 123514: Make it possible to treat non-sequential QIODevice asynchronously

[David Faure]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/123514/#review79774
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Well, you could still set local variables in the lambda and test them after exec, to avoid the issue that Q_ASSERT doesn't work in release mode and isn't as precise as QCOMPARE in case of failure, in debug mode.

- David Faure


On May 2, 2015, 12:57 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/123514/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 2, 2015, 12:57 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Frameworks and David Faure.
> 
> 
> Repository: kio
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> So far, we used to just read whenever some data was required. This works on sequential devices because the data is already available. This is not the case when we have a sequential device, such as a socket, where data arrives when it arrives. This will also prove useful on non-sequential devices as well when we want to keep reading in case new data appears.
> 
> This patch takes the AsyncDataEnabled setting on accordinly by:
> 
> * only reading from the device when readyRead is available.
> * finishes the transfer whenever the device is closed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/core/transferjob.cpp 97a724e 
>   src/widgets/accessmanager.cpp b4ec811 
>   src/core/job_p.h 7ec1a69 
>   src/core/transferjob.h e2fd2e7 
>   autotests/jobtest.cpp 327470a 
>   autotests/accessmanagertest.cpp 5d52553 
>   autotests/jobtest.h 5ccd492 
>   autotests/CMakeLists.txt 7bba3ea 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/123514/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tests still pass, new test also passes.
> 
> The test is using lambdas to delay write. I don't think it's available.
> Can I add some kind of #if HAS_LAMBDA and make the test depend on it?
> I don't think adding slots and make the buffer an attribute would be very nice... I can also sub-class the buffer.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Aleix Pol Gonzalez
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20150502/93fd1cb4/attachment.html>