Also sprach Andre Poenitz:
> On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 08:00:43PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> > OK to apply?
>
> Can't comment much on th ui as I haven't tried it out.
>
> However, I have some style comments/questions.
>
> @@ -173,6 +174,10 @@ QPrefsDialog::QPrefsDialog(QPrefs * form
> connect(convertersModule->converterRemovePB, SIGNAL(clicked()),
> this,
> SLOT(remove_converter()));
>
> Why do we use the free function here and not QObject::connect, i.e.
>
> connect(convertersModule->converterRemovePB, SIGNAL(clicked()),
> SLOT(remove_converter()));
>
> [Note the 'missing' third parameter].
I don't know the exact reason. Ask John who implemented the dialog.
> Apart from that I'd probably even like to see an ASSERT here:
>
>
> BOOST_ASSERT(connect(convertersModule->converterRemovePB,
> SIGNAL(clicked()), SLOT(remove_converter())));
>
> or to make this digestible again:
>
> #define CONNECT(sender, signal, slot) \
> BOOST_ASSERT(connect(sender, SIGNAL(signal), SLOT(slot)))
> ...
>
> CONNECT(convertersModule->converterRemovePB, clicked(),
> remove_converter());
>
> In
>
> + connect(convertersModule->converterToCO, SIGNAL(activated(const
> QString&)), this, SLOT(converter_changed()));
>
> LyXStyle would be 'QString const &'.
>
> I know that early MOC had a problem with that, but as 3.3.3's moc
> definitely understands 'LyX style' I'd assume that 3.0.4's does as well.
>
> Converters::const_iterator cend = form_->converters().end();
> for (; ccit != cend; ++ccit) {
> - string const name(ccit->From->prettyname() + " -> " +
> - ccit->To->prettyname());
> + std::string const name(ccit->From->prettyname() + " -> "
> + + ccit->To->prettyname());
>
> LyX code uses
>
> + std::string const name = ccit->From->prettyname() + "
> -> "
> + + ccit->To->prettyname();
>
>
> There are 'good' reasons to use either form, but for uniformity's sake
> use the latter. Less pitfalls at least.
I have no strong feeling for either one. So I changed to the latter now.
Jürgen
> Andre'
