[SOLVED]can not declare QIcon in class?

Franzk

uh. Show some code?

vinb

Ok,

In .h:
@
private:
QIcon icon; //makes the program crash.
OR
QIcon *icon//also crashes.
@

In a normal function it works like a charme.

Franzk

Just for kicks, change the name to m_icon and see what happens.

Obviously it isn't just the fact that you do @QIcon *icon@ in some header. There is more to this. The code snippet you showed is just as good as the description you gave. If the above doesn't work, we will need a lot more context to the problem.

renato.filho

can you produce a small example with this problem? (only a small class with QIcon)

vinb

Hi Franzk,

I'm sorry if i'm not clear here, so i try to explain myself a little better now.

I'm writing a little test program where i want to have a icon shown in a listview.

if i use a function call like:
@ QStandardItem *item = new QStandardItem;
item->setIcon(QIcon(":/icon/pic5"));@
then everything works like a charme.
If i do :
@ QStandardItem *item = new QStandardItem;
QIcon proeficon(":/icon/pic5");
item->setIcon(proeficon);@
everything works like a charme.
If i do:
@ QStandardItem *item = new QStandardItem;
QIcon proeficon;
proeficon.addFile(":/icon/pic5");

item->setIcon(proeficon);@

everything works like a charme.

But if i do:

In header:
@
QIcon proeficon;
@
And in the constructor:
@
proeficon.addFile(":/icon/pic5");@
Then my program crashes.

I hope i did explain it better now?

dangelog

Paste a complete, small, compilable testacase.

vinb

Recall:
i just made a small example with only a qicon in the class, but the problem didnt accure.
So i have to puzzle a little bit more, to narrow the problem down.

vinb

Solved:
Very strange,
I just copied the whole class to another one and it worked like expected. So there was nothing wrong with the code.
So i deleted the whole build folder to force creator to build again and everything worked perfectly after that.
Does somebody know what was going on here?

Franzk

Sometimes you just need to rebuild...

vinb

i thought that i had done that, but clearly not