Re: [Rosegarden-devel] Some questions about style

[Tom B. (Tehom) <te...@pa...>]

> On Friday, October 07, 2011, Tom Breton (Tehom) wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the advice.  But Qt wants all "tr" calls anchored in some
>> Qt-derived class.  There is no bare "tr" call.  So having moved them
>> into
>> new classes, any direction I go has an impact.
>
> Qt says it wants, or your code refuses to compile with plain tr() calls?
> That's a level of subtlety I missed the first time through.

Refused to compile (past tense, it's compiling now with
EventParameterDialog::tr).  QObject::tr works too.  I think any QObject
derived class will do.

Sometimes I anthropomorphize libraries and other software.  They "want"
things or "expect" things, they even "hope" and "fear".  It's just a
verbal shorthand I use for their design intentions.

I have another question about the header/cpp policy.  Should even nested
classes go into their own header/cpp files?  Like
Composition::ReferenceSegment.

	Tom Breton (Tehom)