Is this an efficient use of QProcess?

[SGaist]

QProcess::execute(file1, args1);

[graniteDev]

@SGaist I could run these from a static function? How then do I know when they are finished if there is no object to emit the signal?

[SGaist]

Did you read the documentation of the function ? execute runs the command and waits for it to finish. The returned value indicates what happened.

[graniteDev]

@SGaist yes but if i just run QProcess::execute(file1, args1); there is no object there for me to deal with.

[SGaist]

What do you want to deal with ? In the code you shown until now, what you are doing with your QProcess objects is already done "internally" by execute.

[graniteDev]

@SGaist never mind, I misunderstood because I'm not used to dealing with these. I was concerned that the subsequent processes could be started before the previous one finished, however execute is not asynchronous like start() is if I understood the documentation correctly.

[SGaist]

It is indeed not asynchronous.

[graniteDev]

@SGaist ok well thankyou, I will give this a try.

[graniteDev]

@SGaist Worked. Wow is that much much simpler.

If I may though, for my future reference, if I needed to actually use a QProcess *process = new QProcess(this); to run multiple things, how would I go about it?

[SGaist]

If in a fashion similar to execute see the Synchronous Process API in QProcess's documentation.

[JonB]

@graniteDev said in Is this an efficient use of QProcess?:

If I may though, for my future reference, if I needed to actually use a QProcess *process = new QProcess(this); to run multiple things, how would I go about it?

Exactly as per your original code, except change execute() to start().