<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[State of QSignalMapper]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hi all,</p>
<p dir="auto">while investigating the possibility to enhance QSignalMapper with support for QVariant mapping, I came across this ticket: <a href="https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-4035" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow ugc">https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-4035</a></p>
<p dir="auto">Unfortunately, I cannot quite concur with the conclusion that QSignalMapper has become useless with the introduction of lambdas. There are still scenarios - for example when working with plugins - where one doesn't have access to the class method address --and thus needs to rely on the <code>const char*</code> notation derived from the SIGNAL() macro, rendering the connect() signature using a lambda unavailable.<br />
Additionally, although I'm a big fan of lambdas myself, I expect that some teams doing cross-platform development may be reluctant to adopt to C++11 usage for some time.<br />
Having said that, I'd be willing to create a patch and pull request for QSignalMapper to support QVariant, but that wouldn't make sense if you decide to deprecate it, in which case I'd do the mapping locally.</p>
<p dir="auto">All the best<br />
Marcus</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.qt.io/topic/32024/state-of-qsignalmapper</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 18:00:20 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.qt.io/topic/32024.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:58:32 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to State of QSignalMapper on Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:00:35 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hi,</p>
<p dir="auto">I think you have a valid point. If you have a solution for that feature request, you should go ahead and make the patch (start by Qt 5 then cherry-pick for Qt 4).</p>
<p dir="auto">Nobody said QSignalMapper will be deprecated</p>
<p dir="auto">Happy coding !</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.qt.io/post/195492</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.qt.io/post/195492</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[SGaist]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:00:35 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>