On 21.07.2021 18:42, Harald Sitter wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 4:38 PM George Florea Banus
<georgefb...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 21.07.2021 13:53, Harald Sitter wrote:
- the color-schemes dir seems to do nothing. it installs files that
don't actually exist in the source. fix it or rm -rf?
It had the Breeze color schemes, but I removed them because I don't know
their licenses
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=434465
Good call. Maybe add a comment to the commented out option in the
cmakelists? There is also the question whether it is a good idea to
copy the schemes to begin with though. What's the use case behind
this?
I think it was for Windows.
- for the screenshots.md and the metainfo.xml you should consider
using our screenshot CDN instead
https://invent.kde.org/websites/product-screenshots
Already submitted a merge request
- not sure how big of a concern that will be in practice, but you
should be careful with calling mimeTypeForFile, it is potentially
costly and a local path may still be backed by a network'd mount. when
in doubt it's probably better to check KFileItem::isSlow() first and
use mimeTypeForUrl when isSlow is true (or resolve the mimetype in a
qfuture/thread)
mimeTypeForUrl says it will use mimeTypeForFile for local files. Is
checking with KFileItem::isSlow() still necessary?
You are right, I am misremember. What you want to do is match on
extension only when the file is slow
https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qmimedatabase.html#MatchMode-enum
Mind you, putting the mimetype resolution into a QFuture (and not
change the matchmode) still might be better choice over all since you
eventually create previews that will read form the file anyway. So, if
you first resolve a mimetype no harm is done, so long as you don't do
it on the qApp thread.
Or is it still needed because "a local path may still be backed by a
network'd mount"?
Yep, that is what KFileItem::isSlow() is telling us. If you always
resolve in a QFuture (even for local files) you don't really need to
check isSlow.
I opted for the KFileItem::isSlow() version as I never used QFuture
before and it seems even more complicated when QML comes into play.
https://invent.kde.org/multimedia/haruna/-/commit/4a4ba7f35ba333b9263b8aecf805189700647a52
- the way static singletons are managed looks a bit old school.
function local statics might be neater
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/storage_duration#Static_local_variables
Single *instance() { static Single s; return &s; }
HS
I searched a little about this and people also recommend disabling the
copying and moving for singletons.
Any opinions on that?
Sounds like a good idea ->
https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qobject.html#Q_DISABLE_COPY_MOVE in private
section of class should get that sorted
Done.
