On Tuesday, July 03, 2012 20:55:45 [email protected] wrote:
> Short note while on vacations... ;-)
> 
> It was a conscious choice by me not to even try to split up QAction.
> QAction is very much bound to widgets and I am not convinced at all it's
> what we would need in QML.
> 
> I think we would be better served in rethinking what is required for Qt
> Quick and QML components and then try to figure out whether the class
> should best live in QtGui, in QtQml or QtQuick.

... effectively making such a new QQuickAction or similar class not usable in 
hybrid applications.

Hybrid applications using QtWidgets will use QAction, and if they want to 
integrate with QML they will have to export their QActions instead of using 
the new QQuickAction. 

It might be possible to make such a QQuickAction able to integrate with 
widgets, but no one ever claimed that was a goal. If it was a goal, then the 
API would be awful for BC reasons if done after 5.0.

So where hybrid applications are used (presumably one of the things to aim for 
transitionally at least), we'll have two different and incompatible 'action' 
classes. That's not very appealing.

I'm just pointing out the consequences of the choice, which I think belong 
with the statement of it. 

Thanks,

-- 
Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to