> Hi Willy,

>

> I don't know what to say. When I was porting the muse classes to Qt4,

> I tried to be careful about using Q_OBJECT in Qt-derived classes. It

> is possible that I made mistakes here and there but I tried to include

> it whenever it was really needed, i.e. when the class was using

> signals/slots.



Yes I agree to the fact,

that we don't necessary need Q_OBJECT

when it is not necessary (e.g. w.o. signal/slots)



>

> In the future, if we really need to include this in classes that were

> skipped, we can introduce them in case-by-case basis. For now I don't

> see a reason to create bloated binaries. I am not sure what everyone

> else thinks, but these are my opinions.



I noticed, that in the muse2 code

you used Q_OBJECT in quite a lot cases

not at the beginning (right after the openeing brace '{' )

indeed:

Q_OBJECT is in lots of cases behind a group of private var declarations!


As stated in all QT Example documentation classes

the Q_OBJECT HAS TO BE right at the beginning of each class.

I don't know why,

BUT I guess It will lead to problems later on,


Bye,

Willy



BTW: When I remind the Qt Documentation correct,

the usage of Q_OBJECT does not produce bloated code.

It will only generate code when signal, slots of Q_PROPERTY are used!