On Freitag, 28. Mai 2021 11:49:35 CEST Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
> Random thoughts: Could this willingness to replace virtual
> protected functions by signals be linked to QML?
> In QML we do not have virtual protected functions and can only use
> signals...
>
Yes, that how all the methods are handl
On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 14:52, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
>
> Most of the changes to signal form are not that simple, and requires a lot
> more work. Not even sure we will manage to deal with the mess that is
> acceptNavigationRequest before feature freeze.
It's easy, if you force users to use
On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2021 14:41:54 CEST you wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 14:17, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
>
> But it does not change my point about signal vs protected functions.
> Let's say I have a QWebEnginePage subclass that only allows some SSL errors
> by checking asynchronously a blocked
On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 14:17, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2021 13:55:01 CEST Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 11:25, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
> >
> > But then in my code, each time I see a CrazySSLPage I am never sure that
> it
> > will ignore SSL errors.
On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2021 13:55:01 CEST Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 11:25, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
>
> But then in my code, each time I see a CrazySSLPage I am never sure that it
> will ignore SSL errors. Maybe someone called QObject::disconnect() on it.
>
> CrazySSLPage pag
On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 11:25, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
>
> I am not sure I see a significant difference. They are both compile-time.
> A
> "user" of your widget could also derive it and override the virtual
> function
> just as well as they could override your the signals?
>
>
>
No, they are
On Wednesday, 26 May 2021 18:39:56 CEST Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just saw this ticket: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-74587
> and this related gerrit change:
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtwebengine/+/346723
>
> I am not sure what to think about it.
> Sure it is nice
Hi,
I just saw this ticket: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-74587
and this related gerrit change:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtwebengine/+/346723
I am not sure what to think about it.
Sure it is nice to be able to customize a QWebEnginePage without deriving
from it, but turning
