Can you explain me this code?

[jsulm]

@VRonin Oh, somehow I missed that "new" :-)

[thippu]

@jsulm said in Can you explain me this code?:

In this case you need to check what setSettingsObject does to know whether it is a bug or not. Can you show its content?

It was from the example "Settings editor", I'm studying the mechanism of it.

[jsulm]

@thippu See what @VRonin wrote. I didn't notice the "new QSettings", need to read more carefully :-)

[jsulm]

@thippu said in Can you explain me this code?:

example "Settings editor"

Oh, if this is from official Qt example than you should file a bug as this is a bad example then.

[thippu]

@jsulm said in Can you explain me this code?:

Oh, somehow I missed that "new" :-)

Really, you are the author?. :-)

[jsulm]

@thippu No, I'm not else @VRonin would punish me :-)
I mean I did not notice it then I read your first post in this thread. I think I didn't notice it because I read it while you were stil changing it. It was first

QSettings settings;

[J.Hilk]

@VRonin said in Can you explain me this code?:

Whoever wrote that code should undergo dire punishment

Well, should be possible. It's been written here

http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtwidgets-tools-settingseditor-mainwindow-cpp.html

should be in the docu change log right :)

[thippu]

@jsulm oh, yeah true I did edit once.

[VRonin]

@thippu said in Can you explain me this code?:

It was from the example "Settings editor", I'm studying the mechanism of it.

The example is correct: typedef QSharedPointer<QSettings> SettingsPtr; and then

SettingsPtr settings(new QSettings(locationDialog->format(),
                                       locationDialog->scope(),
                                       locationDialog->organization(),
                                       locationDialog->application()));

or SettingsPtr settings(new QSettings(fileName, QSettings::IniFormat));

The problem is you took the liberty of replacing a shared pointer with a stack object

[thippu]

@VRonin you are right, sorry, I thought that time It would not matter.