[PyKDE] Dropping SIGNAL() and SLOT() in PyQt4?

[David Boddie]

On Sun Feb 19 15:30:53, Giovanni Bajo wrote:

> Phil Thompson <phil at riverbankcomputing.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > (In fact I don't see why Qt still needs SIGNAL() and SLOT() - maybe
> > the speed penalty of the alternative is more an issue at the C++
> > level.)
> 
> Nah. There's boost::signal, which is a full-blown signal/slot implementation
> which works totally at compile time and has zero overhead. In fact, there is
> technically *nothing* that moc does which cannot be done with C++ and some
> advanced tecniques. But Trolltech seems to like the separate compilation
> step more than templates.

Indeed, but see these documents for a more complete discussion:

http://doc.trolltech.com/4.1/templates.html
http://scottcollins.net/articles/a-deeper-look-at-signals-and-slots.html

I think one of the motivations for using a preprocessor-based approach is
the continued lack of support for certain C++ advanced techniques with some
compilers. Nonetheless, the first document aims to provide other
justifications for using moc.

> > So, what so you think? Is dropping them to much of a cultural change?
> > (Of course they could also be made optional.)
> 
> I'm fine with dropping them as long as they're optional.

I also think it's fine to make them optional. Some people might appreciate
the explicit nature of SIGNAL and SLOT in their code.

I imagine it's still possible to distinguish between signals and slots with
this method, and continue to allow signals to be connected to signals without
ambiguity.

David