[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: KTempFile->QTemporaryFile
From: "Jaison Lee" <lee.jaison () gmail ! com>
Date: 2006-09-18 13:52:53
Message-ID: 2d720bd30609180652n4f89964dv400734fcde5d72f4 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
> Do you think it makes sense to have a constructor that matches what we had in
> KDE3?
>
> KTempFile (QString filePrefix=QString::null, QString
> fileExtension=QString::null)
I don't feel VERY strongly about it, but I decided against something
like this for two reasons:
1) I don't want to confuse users of QTemporaryFile and KTempFile. I
don't want QTemporaryFile users to think that setting the file
template is EXACTLY the same as setting the prefix (it's not) and I
don't want KTempFile users thinking that they can make a
KTemporaryFile in the same way as a KTempFile and have it work EXACTLY
the same as before (they still have to call setAutoRemove(false) and
open() to maintain identical behavior).
2) There is definately a movement towards simpler constructors right
now, and most of this variety of KTempFile calls I've seen end up
being rather long because they do things like:
KTempFile temp(KStandardDirs::locateLocal("appdata",
fileinfo.basename()), fileinfo.extension());
That's an awful lot of info to parse. :)
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic