Guard sentinels for slots?
-
Back in the Qt4 days I occasionally ran across references that recommended a guard around slots to prohibit the slot from being recursively called. Here's a quick implementation:
MyQObject::MySlot() { static bool inSlot(false); // probably better to make this a member variable if (!inSlot) { inSlot = true; // *** do important slot stuff *** // maybe emit signals that in a round-about way // cause this slot to be executed again? inSlot = false; } }Is this still a thing? Does Qt5 have any internal checks to make this kind of blocking redundant? Being an admittedly paranoid person, I still frequently do this to protect from signal/slot loops causing a stack overflow.
What's the best practice and caveats these days?
-
Back in the Qt4 days I occasionally ran across references that recommended a guard around slots to prohibit the slot from being recursively called. Here's a quick implementation:
MyQObject::MySlot() { static bool inSlot(false); // probably better to make this a member variable if (!inSlot) { inSlot = true; // *** do important slot stuff *** // maybe emit signals that in a round-about way // cause this slot to be executed again? inSlot = false; } }Is this still a thing? Does Qt5 have any internal checks to make this kind of blocking redundant? Being an admittedly paranoid person, I still frequently do this to protect from signal/slot loops causing a stack overflow.
What's the best practice and caveats these days?
@Kent-Dorfman said in Guard sentinels for slots?:
Does Qt5 have any internal checks to make this kind of blocking redundant?
I don't think so.
The techniques you used in Qt 4 are still valid for Qt 5.
-
Back in the Qt4 days I occasionally ran across references that recommended a guard around slots to prohibit the slot from being recursively called. Here's a quick implementation:
MyQObject::MySlot() { static bool inSlot(false); // probably better to make this a member variable if (!inSlot) { inSlot = true; // *** do important slot stuff *** // maybe emit signals that in a round-about way // cause this slot to be executed again? inSlot = false; } }Is this still a thing? Does Qt5 have any internal checks to make this kind of blocking redundant? Being an admittedly paranoid person, I still frequently do this to protect from signal/slot loops causing a stack overflow.
What's the best practice and caveats these days?
@Kent-Dorfman
As @JKSH says you are still responsible for writing explicit code if you want this check. Doubtless you're well aware already, but (a) you could have this in debug/development code only if you trust to skip it in production and (b) personally in some shape or form I'd implement via, say, a function-scoped local variable whose constructor sets and destructor clears theinSlotso that you don't have to worry about putting areturnin the middle of your code or an exception being raised etc.
