Hello,
I'd like to remove the QTouchEvent::TouchPoint::Primary flag, as per
change request http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,12928
The current purpose of the flag is simply to note that a touch point is
duplicated as a mouse event by the windowing system (to prevent Qt from
also generat
Hi,
ok, I added a adjustSizePolicy property. Please have a look:
http://codereview.qt-project.org/12971
Cheers,
Christoph
11 jan 2012 kl. 12:09 skrev
:
> Yes, if you think this is mostly an issue on initial show, (which I also
> think) then I think such a solution would acceptable.
> The de
It's not quite right. sizeHint() should *always* (regardless of visibility)
return a sensible value.
For the interested, further details can be seen in my comment in the patch.
regards,
Jan-Arve
From: ext Christoph Schleifenbaum [mailto:christoph.schleifenb...@kdab.com]
Sent: 12. januar 2012 15:
Hi,
sizeHint() is returning a valid sizeHint, regardless the scroll area's
visibility:
QSize QAbstractScrollArea::sizeHint() const
{
Q_D(const QAbstractScrollArea);
if (!d->sizeHint.isValid() || d->sizeAdjustPolicy ==
QAbstractScrollArea::AdjustToContents) {
const int f = 2 * d-
Hi Sam,
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Samuel Rødal wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to remove the QTouchEvent::TouchPoint::Primary flag, as per
> change request http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,12928
>
> The current purpose of the flag is simply to note that a touch point is
> duplicated a
Ah, sorry. For some reason I interpreted the || as && :)
So, yes, I agree with the sizeHint implementation.
12.01.12 16:20 skrev ext Christoph Schleifenbaum:
Hi,
sizeHint() is returning a valid sizeHint, regardless the scroll area's
visibility:
QSize QAbstractScrollArea::sizeHint() const
{
On Thursday, 12 de January de 2012 14.26.41, Samuel =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rødal?wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to remove the QTouchEvent::TouchPoint::Primary flag, as per
> change request http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,12928
>
> The current purpose of the flag is simply to note that a touch point
>
> Well, having method createX which creates Y doesn't sound good to me
> either.
>
Yes, this is worse than a binary-only bug.
I don't know the policy for API changes for Qt 5.0,
but when such a thing couldn't be fixed, nothing else
is worth braking source code compatibility.
I would fix it
