Review Request 126789: Don't propagate dataChanged upwards when we are not filtering.

[David Faure]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126789/#review91306
-----------------------------------------------------------



I wrote extensive unit tests for this class.
1) does the unittest still pass?
2) if yes, then it should be extended to test for this case

- David Faure


On Jan. 18, 2016, 9:59 a.m., Volker Krause wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126789/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 18, 2016, 9:59 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Frameworks and Stephen Kelly.
> 
> 
> Repository: kitemmodels
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This avoids expensive layoutChange signals from QSFPM. We can only be sure
> we are not filtering if filterAcceptRows isn't overridden, which we can
> check if we assume sub-classes have the Q_OBJECT macro set.
> 
> This will however break sub-classes overriding filterAcceptRows without
> using the Q_OBJECT macro, and using their own filter criteria. However,
> this is a significant performance improvement in the common case of
> KRFPM being used for string-based searching in a tree view, and the search
> being unused.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/krecursivefilterproxymodel.cpp dbb6eba421c0e680fffe43582f210ea3e42e6e7f 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126789/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested in GammaRay, where the layoutChanges are particularly painful as the source model is in a different process.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Volker Krause
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20160119/62901c30/attachment.html>