Question about the interface classes

Håvard Wall haavardw at ifi.uio.no
Fri Jun 22 16:58:07 CEST 2007


> - less/no multiple inheritance for backend classes

Why is that? Currently you need to subclass both the interface classes and 
QObject. You could make the current interface classes inherit QObject, add 
the virtual functions, make dummy implementations. Wouldn't that be easier 
for everybody. Anyway, you have much more experience with phonon than me, so 
I'm probably missing something or are just plain stupid -)

> Virtual functions make it harder to keep BC.

Sure, I understand you can't add virtual functions after code-freeze/release, 
so new functionality added at a later stage would have to use the 
invokemethod trick.

> For embedded I'd expect the backend to be compiled into libphonon anyway.
> So there you'd redefine the macros to call the backend functions directly
> instead of going through the meta object.

This would make supporting new hardware for an embedded device more work. The 
customer doing the integration no longer only have to write a (more or less) 
simple plugin, but also has to change the optimize the phonon libraries. I'm 
afraid that this increased complexity/cost will make it harder to convince 
people to use phonon on embedded.

> My libphonon has 342kB stripped (x86). But like I said, for embedded you'll
> want to compile the backend into libphonon and make direct calls...

Sure, it's smaller on x86. Doesn't help on ARM though..

Anyway, I get the message..

--
hw


More information about the Phonon-backends mailing list