On Monday 29 of February 2016 08:38:30 Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 29 de fevereiro de 2016 10:09:51 PST Jędrzej Nowacki wrote: > > On Friday 26 of February 2016 15:56:08 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > > I.e. what problems would we get from having to install the > > > > moc files? > > > > > > Lots. > > > > And probably all go away if instead of installing anything we use > > QMetaObjectBuilder (assuming it's api stabilization). Yes it would have > > performance impact, but only on the templated version and only during > > initialization, qml is paying that price constantly without bigger > > complains. It would not require any build system changes. The only > > limitation I can think of right now is that in QObject<Foo>, Foo needs to > > be know to QMetaType system, which is not a big deal. > > What source data do you propose for QMOB?
So for QObject<Foo> moc should generate something like that: { QMetaObjectBuilder builder; // Side note: add overloads that takes type id builder.addProperty("property", "int") builder.addMethod("void Invokable(int)"); builder.setClassName("QObject<" + QMetaType::typeName(qMetaTypeId<Foo>()) + ">") return builder.toMetaObject(); } Yes, it is super inefficient, but in the same time I think it is quite safe to support. Cheers, Jędrek _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development