I am new to QT. As far as I can see, there are two ways to connect signals and slots with each other. One way would be using the connect method. When e.g. wanting to put a method ButtonReleased() to the slot that is triggered after the released() signal of a pushButton with name pushButton, one could write:
connect(ui->pushButton, SIGNAL(released()), this, SLOT(ButtonPressed()));
However, as far as I see, one could also define a method with name on_pushButton_released() to achieve the same connection. Is there any difference between both methods and if so, which one is preferred?
Thanks in advance!
There are indeed two main ways to connect signals to slots.
The first one, using the connect method allows to connect any signal to any slot (or signal) as long as the function signatures match. This is the main way to connect signals in Qt.
The second way are member methods that are called on_ObjectName_SignalName(). These are automatically connected by Qt, if a UI element called ObjectName exists and has a signal called SignalName. This is specifically meant for the use case of having some Widget with a separate .ui file, which contains these elements that you want to connect to. As such, this mechanism does not work if you create UI elements "by hand" in your C++ code.
As you can see, the second mechanism has very specific requirements that need to be satisfied to work, although these are not uncommon. So if you have satisfied these conditions I see no Problem in doing it this way, but others may disagree and this is largely personal preference.
Also note: The syntax in your question is the old syntax from Qt4. If you are using Qt5 and newer, it is highly advised to use the new syntax.
You can read more about signals and slots on the Qt Documentation.
Since creating widgets takes a lot of time, I try to create widgets in different threads and add them to the main layout, but that fails. When creating widgets and then adding them sequentially, the program works normally. Notifications I received: "QObject::setParent: Cannot set parent, new parent is in a different thread"
Is there a way to do it?
No, there is no way to do it.
Qt GUI classes including QWidget must be used only from the main thread.
Quoting Qt documentation:
Although QObject is reentrant, the GUI classes, notably QWidget and
all its subclasses, are not reentrant. They can only be used from the
main thread. As noted earlier, QCoreApplication::exec() must also be
called from that thread.
This is enforced in Qt code by a Q_ASSERT_X when you construct a QWidget:
Q_ASSERT_X(q->thread() == qApp->thread(), "QWidget",
"Widgets must be created in the GUI thread.");
So, even if you would find some work around to make it work, you would not have any guarantee that your code will work in a reproducible way and that any Qt update will not break your code.
Regarding your specific problem, creating widgets should not be time consuming. I can think of 2 reasons why it would be time consuming:
Your widgets are doing heavy computation when you create them. Then you shoul put the computation, and only the computation, in another thread.
You are creating a lot of widgets in one shot. The you can deffer the creation using the event loop. Basically, you create some widgets then post an event or set a timer that will create some more widget, etc. until you meet some stop conditions.
I am trying to reimplement or modify a tab code in a gui application. They are currently using Qt signal and slots system to handle addition and removal of tabs from the tab bar (For example if a tab was being drag from one tab widget to another, the old tab widget will signal the new tab widget that a new tab is coming). I was thinking rather than using that, I could simplify things using a thread safe singleton class. Then when ever a tab is moved, the widget just call on the singleton rather than emitting a signal.
Thanks
Signals and Slots.
Without even starting why the singleton would be bad, the way the data is updated inside Qt would be messed up by the singleton approach.
Don't do that. You are working within an environment and should use the mechanism the framework provides. What about if the UI in the future will have multiple windows and maybe multiple instances?
If possible you should always try to use the way from the framework you are using. This will also help in the future for the maintenance (upgrades, new hires, etc.)
You want to use a singleton, which will accept messages and dispatch them back ? (note: if you use a garden variety object instead of a singleton, you're essentially implementing an Observer pattern).
Then you are reinventing signals and slots, which use a global state internally. Instead of putting work in reinventing some difficult piece of code, why don't you use the already existing signals and slots ?
Having seen earlier existing discussion on "stackoverflow" forum about designing and managing menus and actions under an application being designed & developped under Qt Creator (see "How to connect menu click with action in Qt Creator?" : How to connect menu click with action in Qt Creator?), I'm afraid I have same questions about action buttons in a toolbar I'm trying to create & populate with Qt creator...
So, let's go !
(1) I create at least one action in the Action Editor...
(2) I drag&drop that action to the toolbar
(steps 1 & 2 are ok, no difficulties with these ones, although it is a quite unusal way of doing such things for me, because other UIM designing tools usually propose inverse steps 2 & 1 to do the same, which is more "natural" in my opinion, but, I know, many many things exist and co-exist in our world of software designing & programming...)
=> (3) How to associate (connect) the function (which I'm going to implement) that is supposed to be called when clicking the given toolbar button ?
I mean, how to connect the "triggered" signal for the given action (toolbar button) to the desired slot (function) to be implementing later... ? Is it possible to do such things with the "Signals and slots editor" inside Qt Creator, or do I have to call "connect()" by myself somewhere in the code to achieve this ? Many thanks in advance for any help/suggestion/detailed example for perfect beginner at this point...
In fact, I would to know wether it is possible not to call connect() by myself for such need and wether Qt Creator will create slot (function) prototype by itself or do we have to create such slot (function) prototypes by ourselves before Qt Creator can take the new slot (function) prototype into account and really assist/help user/developper in this usual/normal UIM design step / designing capability... ?
Best regards.
Alain-Pierre
If the QAction is a member if your window, then the normal
QMetaObject::connectSlotsByName(SettingsDialog);
...will connect an action's trigger signal with an appropriately named slot method. This is normally called automatically by GUI classes created using the designer. So if the action is named actionSomething for example, creating a slot in your GUI class with a signature like:
void on_actionSomething_triggered();
...will mean that you don't have to manually connect the signals and slots.
Also, right-clicking on the action in the action editor and selecting 'Go to slot...' will allow you to create a slot function for any signal that the action may emit.
In the Qt world, what is the difference of events and signal/slots?
Does one replace the other? Are events an abstraction of signal/slots?
In Qt, signals and events are both implementations of the Observer pattern. They are used in different situations because they have different strengths and weaknesses.
First of all let's define what we mean by 'Qt event' exactly: a virtual function in a Qt class, which you're expected to reimplement in a base class of yours if you want to handle the event. It's related to the Template Method pattern.
Note how I used the word "handle". Indeed, here's a basic difference between the intent of signals and events:
You "handle" events
You "get notified of" signal emissions
The difference is that when you "handle" the event, you take on the responsibility to "respond" with a behavior that is useful outside the class. For example, consider an app that has a button with a number on it. The app needs to let the user focus the button and change the number by pressing the "up" and "down" keyboard keys. Otherwise the button should function like a normal QPushButton (it can be clicked, etc). In Qt this is done by creating your own little reusable "component" (subclass of QPushButton), which reimplements QWidget::keyPressEvent. Pseudocode:
class NumericButton extends QPushButton
private void addToNumber(int value):
// ...
reimplement base.keyPressEvent(QKeyEvent event):
if(event.key == up)
this.addToNumber(1)
else if(event.key == down)
this.addToNumber(-1)
else
base.keyPressEvent(event)
See? This code presents a new abstraction: a widget that acts like a button, but with some extra functionality. We added this functionality very conveniently:
Since we reimplemented a virtual, our implementation automatically became encapsulated in our class. If Qt's designers had made keyPressEvent a signal, we would need to decide whether to inherit QPushButton or just externally connect to the signal. But that would be stupid, since in Qt you're always expected to inherit when writing a widget with a custom behavior (for good reason - reusability/modularity). So by making keyPressEvent an event, they convey their intent that keyPressEvent is just a basic building block of functionality. If it were a signal, it'd look like a user-facing thing, when it's not intended to be.
Since the base-class-implementation of the function is available, we easily implement the Chain-of-responsibility pattern by handling our special cases (up&down keys) and leaving the rest to the base class. You can see this would be nearly impossible if keyPressEvent were a signal.
The design of Qt is well thought out - they made us fall into the pit of success by making it easy to do the right thing and hard to do the wrong thing (by making keyPressEvent an event).
On the other hand, consider the simplest usage of QPushButton - just instantiating it and getting notified when it's clicked:
button = new QPushButton(this)
connect(button, SIGNAL(clicked()), SLOT(sayHello())
This is clearly meant to be done by the user of the class:
if we had to subclass QPushButton every time we want some button to notify us of a click, that would require a lot of subclasses for no good reason! A widget that always shows a "Hello world" messagebox when clicked is useful only in a single case - so it's totally not reusable. Again, we have no choice but to do the right thing - by connecting to it externally.
we may want to connect several slots to clicked() - or connect several signals to sayHello(). With signals there is no fuss. With subclassing you would have to sit down and ponder some class diagrams until you decide on an appropriate design.
Note that one of the places QPushButton emits clicked() is in its mousePressEvent() implementation. That doesn't mean clicked() and mousePressEvent() are interchangable - just that they're related.
So signals and events have different purposes (but are related in that both let you "subscribe" to a notification of something happening).
I don’t like the answers so far. – Let me concentrate on this part of the question:
Are events an abstraction of signal/slots?
Short answer: no. The long answer raises a “better” question: How are signals and events related?
An idle main loop (Qt’s for example) is usually “stuck” in a select() call of the operating system. That call makes the application “sleep”, while it passes a bunch of sockets or files or whatever to the kernel asking for: if something changes on these, let the select() call return. – And the kernel, as the master of the world, knows when that happens.
The result of that select() call could be: new data on the socket connect to X11, a packet to a UDP port we listen on came in, etc. – That stuff is neither a Qt signal, nor a Qt event, and the Qt main loop decides itself if it turns the fresh data into the one, the other or ignores it.
Qt could call a method (or several) like keyPressEvent(), effectively turning it into a Qt event. Or Qt emits a signal, which in effect looks up all functions registered for that signal, and calls them one after the other.
One difference of those two concepts is visible here: a slot has no vote on whether other slots registered to that signal will get called or not. – Events are more like a chain, and the event handler decides if it interrupts that chain or not. Signals look like a star or tree in this respect.
An event can trigger or be entirely turned into a signal (just emit one, and don’t call “super()”). A signal can be turned into an event (call an event handler).
What abstracts what depends on the case: the clicked()-signal abstracts mouse events (a button goes down and up again without too much moving around). Keyboard events are abstractions from lower levels (things like 果 or é are several key strokes on my system).
Maybe the focusInEvent() is an example of the opposite: it could use (and thus abstract) the clicked() signal, but I don’t know if it actually does.
The Qt documentation probably explains it best:
In Qt, events are objects, derived
from the abstract QEvent class, that
represent things that have happened
either within an application or as a
result of outside activity that the
application needs to know about.
Events can be received and handled by
any instance of a QObject subclass,
but they are especially relevant to
widgets. This document describes how
events are delivered and handled in a
typical application.
So events and signal/slots are two parallel mechanisms accomplishing the same things. In general, an event will be generated by an outside entity (for example, keyboard or mouse wheel) and will be delivered through the event loop in QApplication. In general, unless you set up the code, you will not be generating events. You might filter them through QObject::installEventFilter() or handle events in subclassed object by overriding the appropriate functions.
Signals and Slots are much easier to generate and receive and you can connect any two QObject subclasses. They are handled through the Metaclass (have a look at your moc_classname.cpp file for more), but most of the interclass communication that you will produce will probably use signals and slots. Signals can get delivered immediately or deferred via a queue (if you are using threads).
A signal can be generated.
Events are dispatched by the event loop. Each GUI program needs an event loop, whatever you write it Windows or Linux, using Qt, Win32 or any other GUI library. As well each thread has its own event loop. In Qt "GUI Event Loop" (which is the main loop of all Qt applications) is hidden, but you start it calling:
QApplication a(argc, argv);
return a.exec();
Messages OS and other applications send to your program are dispatched as events.
Signals and slots are Qt mechanisms. In the process of compilations using moc (meta-object compiler), they are changed to callback functions.
Event should have one receiver, which should dispatch it. No one else should get that event.
All slots connected to the emitted signal will be executed.
You shouldn't think of Signals as events, because as you can read in the Qt documentation:
When a signal is emitted, the slots connected to it are usually executed immediately, just like a normal function call. When this happens, the signals and
slots mechanism is totally independent
of any GUI event loop.
When you send an event, it must wait for some time until the event loop dispatches all events that came earlier. Because of this, execution of the code after sending event or signal is different. Code following sending an event will be run immediately. With the signals and slots mechanisms it depends on the connection type. Normally it will be executed after all slots. Using Qt::QueuedConnection, it will be executed immediately, just like events. Check all connection types in the Qt documentation.
There is an article that discusses event processing in some detail: http://www.packtpub.com/article/events-and-signals
It discussions the difference between events and signals here:
Events and signals are two parallel mechanisms used to accomplish the
same thing. As a general difference, signals are useful when using a
widget, whereas events are useful when implementing the widget. For
example, when we are using a widget like QPushButton, we are more
interested in its clicked() signal than in the low-level mouse press
or key press events that caused the signal to be emitted. But if we
are implementing the QPushButton class, we are more interested in the
implementation of code for mouse and key events. Also, we usually
handle events but get notified by signal emissions.
This seems to be a common way of talking about it, as the accepted answer uses some of the same phrases.
Note, please see helpful comments below on this answer from Kuba Ober, that make me wonder if it might be a bit simplistic.
TL;DR: Signals and slots are indirect method calls. Events are data structures. So they are quite different animals.
The only time when they come together is when slot calls are made across thread boundaries. The slot call arguments are packed up in a data structure and get sent as an event to the receiving thread's event queue. In the receiving thread, the QObject::event method unpacks the arguments, executes the call, and possibly returns the result if it was a blocking connection.
If we're willing to generalize to oblivion, one could think of events as as a way of invoking the target object's event method. This is an indirect method call, after a fashion - but I don't think it's a helpful way of thinking about it, even if it's a true statement.
'Event processing' by Leow Wee Kheng says:
Jasmine Blanchette says:
The main reason why you would use events rather than standard function calls, or signals and slots, is that events can be used both synchronously and asynchronously (depending on whether you call sendEvent() or postEvents()), whereas calling a function or invoking a slot is always synchronous. Another advantage of events is that they can be filtered.
Events (in a general sense of user/network interaction) are typically handled in Qt with signals/slots, but signals/slots can do plenty of other things.
QEvent and its subclasses are basically just little standardized data packages for the framework to communicate with your code. If you want to pay attention to the mouse in some way, you only have to look at the QMouseEvent API, and the library designers don't have to reinvent the wheel every time you need to figure out what the mouse did in some corner of the Qt API.
It is true that if you're waiting for events (again in the general case) of some sort, your slot will almost certainly accept a QEvent subclass as an argument.
With that said, signals and slots can certainly be used without QEvents, although you'll find that the original impetus for activating a signal will often be some kind of user interaction or other asynchronous activity. Sometimes, however, your code will just reach a point where firing off a certain signal will be the right thing to do. For example, firing off a signal connected to a progress bar during a long process doesn't involve a QEvent up to that point.
Another minor pragmatic consideration: emitting or receiving signals requires inheriting QObject whereas an object of any inheritance can post or send an event (since you invoke QCoreApplication.sendEvent() or postEvent()) This is usually not an issue but: to use signals PyQt strangely requires QObject to be the first super class, and you might not want to rearrange your inheritance order just to be able to send signals.)
In my opinion events are completely redundant and could be thrown out. There is no reason why signals could not be replaced by events or events by signals, except that Qt is already set up as it is. Queued signals are wrapped by events and events could conceivably be wrapped by signals, for example:
connect(this, &MyItem::mouseMove, [this](QMouseEvent*){});
Would replace the convenience mouseMoveEvent() function found in QWidget (but not in QQuickItem anymore) and would handle mouseMove signals that a scene manager would emit for the item. The fact that the signal is emitted on behalf of the item by some outside entity is unimportant and happens quite often in the world of Qt components, even though it is supposedly not allowed (Qt components often circumvent this rule). But Qt is a conglomerate of many different design decisions and pretty much cast in stone for fear of breaking old code (which happens often enough anyway).