francesco perillo wrote:
>
> So I started to ask myself the necessity to have s_slots and s_events
> (whatever you call them) defined and handled by the programmer.
> And (I understand that QT_SLOTS_CONNECT has a more powerfull syntax
> since it doesn't require you to create SLOT handlers in objects) was
> thinking about the correct way to translate the line
> QObject::connect( &quit, SIGNAL(clicked()), &a, SLOT(quit()) );
> in harbour/Qt ...
>
Harbour's signal/slot handelling is superior then Qt itself.
We can attach a codeblock with it and in the calling code
we can update n number of objects visible into that class/function.
Whereas in Qt it is one-to-one mechanism. The other way around
is also there in Qt but that is little cumbersome.
So, why do you want to translate the
QObject::connect( &quit, SIGNAL(clicked()), &a, SLOT(quit()) );
in another way ?
-----
enjoy hbIDEing...
Pritpal Bedi
http://hbide.vouch.info/
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/hbqt-a-couple-of-questions-tp4874292p4874392.html
Sent from the harbour-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
