I'm studying the Qt4 library and I want to add some functionality to all the children of QWidget in my project. I need all widgets to have mousePressEvent overridden. Obviously I do not need to override it in every particular widget I use(I use many of them and I they to follow DRY rule) , instead I create a Foo class:
class Foo : public QWidget
{
Q_OBJECT
protected:
/* implementation is just a test */
virtual void mousePressEvent(QMouseEvent*) { this->move(0,0); }
};
And derive my button from it:
class FooButton : public QPushButton , public Foo
{
public:
FooButton (QWidget* parent) : QPushButton(parent) { };
};
But the event seems to be not overridden... What am I doing wrong?
Thanks in advance.
For the mousePressEvent access, try QObject::installEventFilter().
http://doc.qt.digia.com/stable/qobject.html
You are inheriting twice now from QWidget. This is problematic (see diamond problem).
Instead, drop your Foo class and move your custom mouse press event handler to your FooButton class:
class FooButton : public QPushButton
{
Q_OBJECT
protected:
/* implementation is just a test */
virtual void mousePressEvent(QMouseEvent*) { this->move(0,0); }
public:
FooButton (QWidget* parent) : QPushButton(parent) { };
};
If this doesn't suit the design of your application, then try using virtual inheritance instead. That is, change Foo to:
class Foo : public virtual QWidget
If that doesn't help, you should follow the advice of the other answers and install an event handler.
(You can read about virtual inheritance in its Wikipedia article.)
I suspect that the problem is that you're inheriting from QWidget twice, once through QPushButton and once through Foo.
From the way you phrased the question, I'm assuming that you want to do this for varying kinds of widgets, and thus don't want to have to subclass QPushButton, QLabel, QCheckBox, etc. If this is not the case then you should use Nikos's answer.
If not, your best bet is probably doing to be to use an event filter.
class MousePressFilter : public QObject {
Q_OBJECT
public:
MousePressFilter(QObject *parent) : QObject(parent) { }
protected:
bool eventFilter(QObject *watched, QEvent *event) {
QWidget *widget = dynamic_cast<QWidget*>(watched);
widget->move(0,0);
return false;
}
};
And then in your Foo class constructor:
class Foo {
Foo() {
installEventFilter( new MousePressFilter(this) );
}
};
Related
We are developing in C++ (and Qt) using Visual Studio 2015 and the Qt Designer for our UI (via Form / .ui files).
We now need to share some Common Data between our UI elements (e.g. most recently used paths etc.) and I would like to do this via dependency injection (i.e. providing the UI with a Reference to the common object during construction) instead of e.g. (ab)using the singleton pattern.
Has someone faced (and solved) similar problems, and is there a sensible way to do this?
Update (to elaborate):
For example I have a custom FooWidget which I wish to use in my FooDialog.ui form file.
// My custom Widget
class FooWidget : public QWidget {
Q_OBJECT
public:
FooWidget(QWidget* parent);
//...
}
// The FooDialog class (scaffolding created by Qt Designer)
class FooDialog : public QDialog {
Q_OBJECT
public:
FooDialog(QWidget* parent) : QDialog(parent), ui (new Ui::FooDialog()) {
ui->setupUp(this);
//...
}
private:
Ui::FooDialog* ui;
}
// The Ui::FooDialog class autogenerated(!) by Qt Designer
// I cannot (must not) change this code, as it will be regenerated every time
class Ui_FooDialog {
public:
FooWidget* widget;
void setupUi(QWidget *fooDialog) {
//...
widget = new FooWidget(fooDialog);
//...
}
}
namespace Ui { class ScannerStatus: public Ui_ScannerStatus {}; }
I would like to provide the FooWidget with a common data object (e.g. text size and colours shared across all my Ui classes), but I can't do so in the constructor (since the autogenerated Ui_FooDialog treats FooWidget as a generic QWidget, which only needs/takes a QWidget* parent in the constructor - I cannot provide a pointer or reference to my shared TextColourAndSize object.
I am aware I could create a second ui->widget->setupTextColourAndSize(...) step in FooDialog (after the initial ui->setupUi(this)) which provides that common data object, but having two init() type functions seems like a rather bad code smell (one is bad enough).
FooWidget needs two constructors, and a setter for the dependency:
explicit FooWidget(QObject *parent = nullptr) : QWidget(parent), … {
…
}
FooWidget(Dependency *dep, QObject *parent = nullptr) : FooWidget(parent) {
setDependency(dep);
}
void setDependency(Dependency *dep) {
…
}
Then you’d set the dependency after the widget is constructed:
FooDialog(Dependency *dep, …) … {
setupUi(this);
ui->fooWidget->setDependency(dep);
}
This could be automated: the parent widget can have a property that holds the pointer to the dependency, and the child widgets can find it automatically:
FooDialog(Dependency *, …) : … {
setProperty("dependency", dep);
setupUi(this);
}
FooWidget(QWidget *parent) : … {
auto *dep = parent() ? parent()->property("dependency").value<Dependency*>() : nullptr;
if (dep) setDependency(dep);
}
This will work with no extra effort if Dependency derives from QObject. Otherwise, you’ll need to have the following in a suitable header file:
class Dependency { … };
Q_DECLARE_METATYPE(Dependency*)
In all circumstances, you do need to promote the fooWidget object to FooWidget class within Qt Designer.
Ok from what I'm seeing you do not need "dependency injection". Question was incorrectly stated.
You can use this custom widget directly from Qt designer.
When you create your FooDialog place regular widget QWidget in place where you need to have a FooWidget.
Then "promote" regular this widget to FooWidget (possibly you have to add some simple information about that type) - (I did that long time ago and do not remember all details).
For detailed instruction just google: qt promote widget qt designer, you will find lots of examples how to do it.
These were good solutions, but talking about dependency injections, there is also an option to have some fun with C++. It's not a wise solution at all, of course I know it, but nevertheless...
foowidget.h
#ifndef FOOWIDGET_H
#define FOOWIDGET_H
#include <QWidget>
class Something
{
public:
QString getHello() const
{ return "Hello world!"; }
};
/***************************************************/
template<typename T>
class Injector
{
public:
QString getHello() const
{ return m_dataContainer.getHello(); }
private:
T m_dataContainer;
};
/***************************************************/
class FooWidget : public QWidget, public Injector<Something>
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
explicit FooWidget(QWidget* parent = nullptr);
protected:
virtual void mousePressEvent(QMouseEvent*) override;
};
#endif // FOOWIDGET_H
foowidget.cpp
#include "foowidget.h"
#include <QMessageBox>
FooWidget::FooWidget(QWidget *parent)
: QWidget(parent)
{ }
void FooWidget::mousePressEvent(QMouseEvent*)
{
QMessageBox::information(nullptr, "Test", getHello());
}
foodialog.h
#ifndef FOODIALOG_H
#define FOODIALOG_H
#include <QDialog>
class SomethingElse
{
public:
QString getHello() const
{ return "OMG! OMG"; }
};
#include "foowidget.h"
namespace Ui {
class FooDialog;
}
class FooDialog : public QDialog, public Injector<SomethingElse>
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
explicit FooDialog(QWidget *parent = nullptr);
~FooDialog();
protected:
void showEvent(QShowEvent *) override;
private:
QScopedPointer<Ui::FooDialog> ui;
};
#endif // FOODIALOG_H
foodialog.cpp
#include "foodialog.h"
#include "ui_foodialog.h"
#include <QMessageBox>
FooDialog::FooDialog(QWidget *parent)
: QDialog(parent)
, ui(new Ui::FooDialog)
{
ui->setupUi(this);
}
FooDialog::~FooDialog()
{ }
void FooDialog::showEvent(QShowEvent *)
{
QMessageBox::information(nullptr, "Test", getHello());
}
Multiple inheritance + deriving widgets from some small template proxy class works for both custom widgets and those, having UI forms. I've put a FooWidget on a FooDialog (via propagation mechanizm) in the sketch above and got two message boxes.
The idea itself can be implemented better, with smarter template usage, just tried to reduce sample code, anyway it's an unnessesary complication. But technically it works without any additional initializations =)
I would like to derive all of my widgets from a base class widget that automatically establishes a signal/slot connection between a slot for the class and a (rarely called) signal.
The slot is a virtual function, so that any widgets for which I wish to implement custom functionality can derive from the virtual slot function. In the desired scenario, all my widgets would derive from this base class with the virtual slot, so that by default all of my widget instances would be connected to the desired signal with a slot defined for the object (with default behavior from the base class).
I know that virtual slots are allowed in Qt. However, deriving from two QObject classes is not supported, so that, for example, the following code is disallowed:
class MySignaler : public QObject
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
MySignaler : QObject(null_ptr) {}
signals:
void MySignal();
}
MySignaler signaler;
class MyBaseWidget: public QObject
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
MyBaseWidget() : QObject(null_ptr)
{
connect(&signaler, SIGNAL(MySignal()), this, SLOT(MySlot()));
}
public slots:
virtual void MySlot()
{
// Default behavior here
}
}
// Not allowed!
// Cannot derive from two different QObject-derived base classes.
// How to gain functionality of both QTabWidget and the MyBaseWidget base class?
class MyTabWidget : public QTabWidget, public MyBaseWidget
{
Q_OBJECT
public slots:
void MySlot()
{
// Decide to handle the signal for custom behavior
}
}
As the sample code demonstrates, it seems impossible to gain both the benefits of (in this example) the QTabWidget, and also the automatic connection from the desired signal function to the virtual slot function.
Is there some way, in Qt, to have all my application's widget classes share common base-class slot and connect() functionality while allowing my widgets to nonetheless derive from Qt widget classes such as QTabWidget, QMainWindow, etc.?
Sometimes when inheritance is problematic, one can replace it, or a part of it, with composition.
That's the approach needed in Qt 4: instead of deriving from a QObject, derive from a non-QObject class (MyObjectShared) that carries a helper QObject that is used as a proxy to connect the signal to its slot; the helper forwards that call to the non-QObject class.
In Qt 5, it is not necessary to derive from a QObject at all: signals can be connected to arbitrary functors. The MyObjectShared class remains the same.
Should Qt 4 compatibility be generally useful in other areas of the code, one can use a generic connect function that connects signals to functors in both Qt 4 and Qt 5 (in Qt 4, it would use an implicit helper QObject).
// https://github.com/KubaO/stackoverflown/tree/master/questions/main.cpp
#include <QtCore>
#include <functional>
#include <type_traits>
class MySignaler : public QObject {
Q_OBJECT
public:
Q_SIGNAL void mySignal();
} signaler;
#if QT_VERSION < 0x050000
class MyObjectShared;
class MyObjectHelper : public QObject {
Q_OBJECT
MyObjectShared *m_object;
void (MyObjectShared::*m_slot)();
public:
MyObjectHelper(MyObjectShared *object, void (MyObjectShared::*slot)())
: m_object(object), m_slot(slot) {
QObject::connect(&signaler, SIGNAL(mySignal()), this, SLOT(slot()));
}
Q_SLOT void slot() { (m_object->*m_slot)(); }
};
#endif
class MyObjectShared {
Q_DISABLE_COPY(MyObjectShared)
#if QT_VERSION < 0x050000
MyObjectHelper helper;
public:
template <typename Derived>
MyObjectShared(Derived *derived) : helper(derived, &MyObjectShared::mySlot) {}
#else
public:
template <typename Derived, typename = typename std::enable_if<
std::is_base_of<MyObjectShared, Derived>::value>::type>
MyObjectShared(Derived *derived) {
QObject::connect(&signaler, &MySignaler::mySignal,
std::bind(&MyObjectShared::mySlot, derived));
}
#endif
bool baseSlotCalled = false;
virtual void mySlot() { baseSlotCalled = true; }
};
class MyObject : public QObject, public MyObjectShared {
Q_OBJECT
public:
MyObject(QObject *parent = nullptr) : QObject(parent), MyObjectShared(this) {}
// optional, needed only in this immediately derived class if you want the slot to be a
// real slot instrumented by Qt
#ifdef Q_MOC_RUN
void mySlot();
#endif
};
class MyDerived : public MyObject {
public:
bool derivedSlotCalled = false;
void mySlot() override { derivedSlotCalled = true; }
};
void test1() {
MyObject base;
MyDerived derived;
Q_ASSERT(!base.baseSlotCalled);
Q_ASSERT(!derived.baseSlotCalled && !derived.derivedSlotCalled);
signaler.mySignal();
Q_ASSERT(base.baseSlotCalled);
Q_ASSERT(!derived.baseSlotCalled && derived.derivedSlotCalled);
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
test1();
QCoreApplication app(argc, argv);
test1();
return 0;
}
#include "main.moc"
To share some code between two QObjects, you could have the QObject as a member of the class,an interposing non-object class that uses generic class that's parametrized only on the base type. The generic class can have slots and signals. They must be made visible to moc only in the immediately derived class - and not in any further derived ones.
Alas, you generally cannot connect any of the generic class's signals or slots in the constructor of the class, since at that point the derived class isn't constructed yet, and its metadata isn't available - from Qt's perspective, the signals and slots don't exist as such. So the Qt 4-style runtime-checked connect will fail.
The compile-time-checked connect will not even compile, because the this pointer it works on has an incorrect compile-time type, and you know nothing about the type of the derived class.
A workaround for Qt-4 style connect only is to have a doConnections method that the derived constructor has to call, where the connections are made.
Thus, let's make the generic class parametric on the base and the derived class as well - the latter is known as the Curiously Recurring Template Pattern, or CRTP for short.
Now you have access to the derived class's type, and can use a helper function to convert this to a pointer to the derived class, and use it in the Qt 5-style compile-time-checked connects.
The Qt 4-style runtime checked connect still needs to be invoked from doConnections. So,if you use Qt 5, that's not an issue. You shouldn't be using Qt 4-style connect in Qt 5 code anyway.
The slots require slightly different treatment depending on whether the class immediately derived from the generic class overrides them or not.
If a slot is virtual and has an implementation in the immediately derived class, you should expose it to moc in the normal fashion - using a slots section or the Q_SLOT macro.
If a slot doesn't have an implementation in the immediately derived class (whether virtual or not), its implementation in the generic class should be made visible to moc only, but not to the compiler - you don't wish to override it, after all. Thus the slot declarations are wrapped in #ifdef Q_MOC_RUN block that is only active when moc is reading the code. The generated code will refer to the generic implementations of the slots.
As we wish to make sure this indeed works, we'll add some booleans to track whether the slots were invoked.
// main.cpp
#include <QtWidgets>
template <class Base, class Derived> class MyGenericView : public Base {
inline Derived* dthis() { return static_cast<Derived*>(this); }
public:
bool slot1Invoked, slot2Invoked, baseSlot3Invoked;
MyGenericView(QWidget * parent = 0) : Base(parent),
slot1Invoked(false), slot2Invoked(false), baseSlot3Invoked(false)
{
QObject::connect(dthis(), &Derived::mySignal, dthis(), &Derived::mySlot2); // Qt 5 style
QObject::connect(dthis(), &Derived::mySignal, dthis(), &Derived::mySlot3);
}
void doConnections() {
Q_ASSERT(qobject_cast<Derived*>(this)); // we must be of correct type at this point
QObject::connect(this, SIGNAL(mySignal()), SLOT(mySlot1())); // Qt 4 style
}
void mySlot1() { slot1Invoked = true; }
void mySlot2() { slot2Invoked = true; }
virtual void mySlot3() { baseSlot3Invoked = true; }
void emitMySignal() {
emit dthis()->mySignal();
}
};
The generic class is very simple to use. Remember to wrap any non-virtual overridden slots in a moc-only guard!
Also recall the general rule that applies to all Qt code: if you have a slot, it should be declared to moc only once. So, if you had a class that further derives from MyTreeWidget or MyTableWidget, you don't want a Q_SLOT or slots macro in front of any necessarily virtual slot overrides. If present, it'll subtly break things. But you definitely want Q_DECL_OVERRIDE.
If you're on Qt 4, remember to call doConnections, otherwise the method is unnecessary.
The particular choice of QTreeWidget and QTableWidget is completely arbitrary, meaningless, and shouldn't be taken to mean that such use makes any sense (it likely doesn't).
class MyTreeWidget : public MyGenericView<QTreeWidget, MyTreeWidget> {
Q_OBJECT
public:
bool slot3Invoked;
MyTreeWidget(QWidget * parent = 0) : MyGenericView(parent), slot3Invoked(false) { doConnections(); }
Q_SIGNAL void mySignal();
#ifdef Q_MOC_RUN // for slots not overridden here
Q_SLOT void mySlot1();
Q_SLOT void mySlot2();
#endif
// visible to the C++ compiler since we override it
Q_SLOT void mySlot3() Q_DECL_OVERRIDE { slot3Invoked = true; }
};
class LaterTreeWidget : public MyTreeWidget {
Q_OBJECT
public:
void mySlot3() Q_DECL_OVERRIDE { } // no Q_SLOT macro - it's already a slot!
};
class MyTableWidget : public MyGenericView<QTreeWidget, MyTableWidget> {
Q_OBJECT
public:
MyTableWidget(QWidget * parent = 0) : MyGenericView(parent) { doConnections(); }
Q_SIGNAL void mySignal();
#ifdef Q_MOC_RUN
Q_SLOT void mySlot1();
Q_SLOT void mySlot2();
Q_SLOT void mySlot3(); // for MOC only since we don't override it
#endif
};
Finally, this little test case shows that it indeed works as desired.
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
QApplication a(argc, argv);
MyTreeWidget tree;
MyTableWidget table;
Q_ASSERT(!tree.slot1Invoked && !tree.slot2Invoked && !tree.slot3Invoked);
emit tree.mySignal();
Q_ASSERT(tree.slot1Invoked && tree.slot2Invoked && tree.slot3Invoked);
Q_ASSERT(!table.slot1Invoked && !table.slot2Invoked && !table.baseSlot3Invoked);
emit table.mySignal();
Q_ASSERT(table.slot1Invoked && table.slot2Invoked && table.baseSlot3Invoked);
return 0;
}
#include "main.moc"
This approach gives you the following:
The common code class derives from the base class, and can thus easily invoke or override the behavior of the base class. In this particular example, you can reimplement the QAbstractItemView methods etc.
There is full support for signals and slots. Even though the signals and slots are declared as such in the metadata of the derived class, you can still use them in the generic class.
In this situation you may make use of composition rather than multiple inheritance. Something like this:
class MySignaler : public QObject
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
MySignaler : QObject(NULL) {}
signals:
void MySignal();
}
MySignaler signaler;
class MyBaseWidgetContainer: public QWidget
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
MyBaseWidgetContainer() : QObject(NULL), widget(NULL)
{
connect(&signaler, SIGNAL(MySignal()), this, SLOT(MySlot()));
}
public slots:
virtual void MySlot()
{
// Default behavior here
}
private:
QWidget *widget;
}
class MyTabWidgetContainer : public MyBaseWidgetContainer
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
MyTabWidgetContainer() {
widget = new QTabWidget(this);
QLayout *layout = new QBoxLayout(this);
layout->addWidget(widget);
}
public slots:
void MySlot()
{
// Decide to handle the signal for custom behavior
}
}
I am writing for the Qt framework and I want to create a QWidget. QWidget exposes some interfaces such as mousePressEvent and mouseReleaseEvent. I want to extend this class to allow mouseClickEvent and mouseDoubleClickEvent. Normally, you would think to extend QWidget and implement those functions. The problem is that there are other classes (QPushButton for example) provided as part of the library which extend QWidget. Therefore, how do I get that added functionality into those classes without having to extend each one and copy the code?
class ClickHandeler : public QWidget {
virtual void mouseClickEvent();
virtual void mouseDoubleClickEvent();
int clickCount; //initialized to 0;
void mouseReleaseEvent(QEvent *event){
clickCount++;
QTimer::singleShot(500, this, SLOT(checkClick()));
}
void checkClick(){
if (clickCount == 2){
this->mouseDoubleClickEvent();
clickCount = clickCount-2;
} else {
this->mouseDoubleEvent()
clickCount--;
}
}
}
// QPushButton inherits QWidget too! Yikes!
class MyPushButton : public QPushButton, public ClickHandeler {
void mouseClickEvent(){
alert("i have been clicked");
}
void mouseDoubleClickEvent(){
alert("i have been double clicked");
}
}
I want something like MyPushButton, but I am worried that the function overriding will not work as expected.
Im sorry if this question is obvious to people, but I do not know what the terminology is. I have googled interfaces for c++ and I get abstract interfaces (which doesnt properly solve this problem). If I'm just being stupid and need to know a better term for google, let me know in the comments and Ill remove the question.
I think you just need to extend the QWidget and call the QWidget same functions.
For example:
class QWidget {
public:
void mouseClickEvent();
};
class QPushButton {
public:
void mouseClickEvent();
};
class MyWidget : public QWidget, public QPushButton {
public:
void mouseClickEvent()
{
//base::mouseClickEvent();// ambiguous
QWidget::mouseClickEvent();
QPushButton::mouseClickEvent();
/* Do your own code here */
}
};
Following case:
Let's say there is a binary library which defines the class "Base", and many subclasses ("Derivative1", "Derivative2" etc) of it.
I want to extend these subclasses in my own code, but because my extensions are the same for all subclasses as they only deal with parts of Base, it would be tedious to subclass every Derivative class and add the same code over and over again.
My first idea was to simply write a class template which would do the work for me, but because the library I'm dealing with is Qt, QObject has foiled me.
My second idea was to use macros to generate each class structure, but this was also thwarted by moc.
The "reparent" in the title is because I thought of deriving from Base and creating BaseExtended, and then somehow tell the compiler to reparent every Derivative to this extended class. Isn't there a way to for example declare the "Base" in "BaseExtended" virtual, and then just write
class Derivative1Extended : public Derivative1, public BaseExtended {}
and have the virtual Base in BaseExtended point to the Base in Derivative1, thus basically "squeezing ing" my extensions between Base and Derivative1?
(By the way, I tried to keep the above as generic as possible, but what I'm actually doing is trying add signals for "focusIn" and "focusOut" to every QWidget derivative without writing the same code over and over again for every QWidget subclass I use)
EDIT:
For reference, here's my current implementation:
// qwidgetfs.h
class QLineEditFS : public QLineEdit
{
Q_OBJECT
private:
void focusInEvent(QFocusEvent *);
void focusOutEvent(QFocusEvent *);
public:
QLineEditFS(QWidget *parent = 0);
signals:
void focusReceived(QWidgetFS::InputType);
void focusLost();
};
// qwidgetfs.cpp
QLineEditFS::QLineEditFS(QWidget *parent /*= 0*/)
: QLineEdit(parent)
{}
void QLineEditFS::focusInEvent(QFocusEvent *e)
{
QLineEdit::focusInEvent(e);
emit focusReceived(QWidgetFS::InputText);
}
void QLineEditFS::focusOutEvent(QFocusEvent *e)
{
QLineEdit::focusOutEvent(e);
emit focusLost();
}
And this repeated for QSpinBoxFS, QComboBoxFS, QCheckBoxFS and so on...
Instead I would like to just define this logic in a common class QWidgetFS, and then "inject" it into other classes derived from QWidget
I'm not sure you'll really be able to do what you are suggesting without modifying Qt and recompiling it.
Perhaps to do what you want, you could use event filters installed on the objects that you want to handle focus events from?
little test app:
header:
class FocusEventFilter : public QObject
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
FocusEventFilter(QObject* parent)
: QObject(parent)
{}
Q_SIGNALS:
void focusIn(QWidget* obj, QFocusEvent* e);
void focusOut(QWidget* obj, QFocusEvent* e);
protected:
bool eventFilter(QObject *obj, QEvent *e);
};
class testfocus : public QMainWindow
{
Q_OBJECT
public:
testfocus(QWidget *parent = 0, Qt::WFlags flags = 0);
~testfocus();
public Q_SLOTS:
void onFocusIn(QWidget*, QFocusEvent*);
void onFocusOut(QWidget*, QFocusEvent*);
private:
Ui::testfocusClass ui;
};
Implementation
#include <QFocusEvent>
#include "testfocus.h"
bool FocusEventFilter::eventFilter(QObject *obj, QEvent *e)
{
if (e->type() == QEvent::FocusIn) {
bool r = QObject::eventFilter(obj, e);
QFocusEvent *focus = static_cast<QFocusEvent*>(e);
QWidget* w = qobject_cast<QWidget*>(obj);
if (w) {
emit focusIn(w, focus);
}
return r;
}
else if (e->type() == QEvent::FocusOut) {
bool r = QObject::eventFilter(obj, e);
QFocusEvent *focus = static_cast<QFocusEvent*>(e);
QWidget* w = qobject_cast<QWidget*>(obj);
if (w) {
emit focusOut(w, focus);
}
return r;
}
else {
// standard event processing
return QObject::eventFilter(obj, e);
}
}
testfocus::testfocus(QWidget *parent, Qt::WFlags flags)
: QMainWindow(parent, flags)
{
ui.setupUi(this);
FocusEventFilter* filter = new FocusEventFilter(this);
ui.lineEdit->installEventFilter(filter);
ui.lineEdit_2->installEventFilter(filter);
connect(filter, SIGNAL(focusIn(QWidget*, QFocusEvent*)), this, SLOT(onFocusIn(QWidget*, QFocusEvent*)));
connect(filter, SIGNAL(focusOut(QWidget*, QFocusEvent*)), this, SLOT(onFocusOut(QWidget*, QFocusEvent*)));
}
testfocus::~testfocus()
{
}
void testfocus::onFocusIn(QWidget* obj, QFocusEvent*)
{
obj->setStyleSheet("background-color:#aaaaff;");
}
void testfocus::onFocusOut(QWidget* obj, QFocusEvent*)
{
obj->setStyleSheet("background-color:#ffaaaa;");
}
Of course, YMMV. You could always have a separate filter per object. This method means you can avoid deriving from everything. Not as efficient but it should work.
You may be able to do what you want in the event filter itself rather than using signals/slots.
I have done stuff like this in the past with templates. The problem is that you can't use signals.
I'm typing this up without a compiler so please be kind :):
template<typename T>
class FSWidget: public T
{
public:
FSWidget()
{
_delegate = NULL;
}
setDelegate(FSDelegate *delegate)
{
_delegate = delegate;
}
protected:
virtual void focusInEvent(QFocusEvent *e)
{
T::focusInEvent(e);
if (_delegate) {
_delegate->focusInEvent(this);
}
}
virtual void focusOutEvent(QFocusEvent *e)
{
T::focusOutEvent(e);
if (_delegate) {
_delegate->focusOutEvent(this);
}
}
private:
FSDelegate *_delegate;
};
So, the advantage is when you need to use this you can basically create a class like this:
FSWidget<QLineEdit *> lineEdit = new FSWidget<QLineEdit *>;
lineEdit->setDelegate(delegate);
You can put in whatever you want instead of QLineEdit and it will work.
And then teh FSDelegate could be just an interface that you mix into whatever class needs to act on the info. It could be one of these:
class FSDelegate
{
public:
virtual void focusInEvent(QWidget *w) = 0;
virtual void focusOutEvent(QWidget *w) = 0;
};
If you're always doing the same thing in on focusInEvent and focusOutEvents, you can implement these functions and make a real Mixin class.
Hopefully this can avoid some code duplication for you.
this is a simple OOP QT question.
my app consists of main window (QMainWindow) and a table (QTableWidget).
in the main window i have arguments and variables which i would like to pass to the table class, and to access methods in main widnow class from the table class, how should i do it ?
mainwindow.h
class MainWindow : public QMainWindow {
Q_OBJECT
private:
int a;
int b;
Spreadsheet *spreadsheet;
public:
void set_a(int);
void set_b(int);
spreadsheet.h
class Spreadsheet : public QTableWidget {
Q_OBJECT
public:
Spreadsheet(QWidget *parent = 0);
atm i define Spreadsheet like this:
spreadsheet = new Spreadsheet(this);
and i'd like to access set_a() from spreadsheet.cpp...
You should consider a different design, you are tightly coupling your code.
Maybe something like the following...
class Spreadsheet : public QTableWidget
{
Q_OBJECT
signals:
void aValueChanged(int value);
void bValueChanged(int value);
public:
void doSomething()
{
emit aValueChanged(100);
}
};
class MainWindow : public QMainWindow
{
public:
MainWindow() :
a(0),
b(0)
{
connect(&spreadsheet, SIGNAL(aValueChanged(int)), this, SLOT(setA(int)));
connect(&spreadsheet, SIGNAL(bValueChanged(int)), this, SLOT(setB(int)));
spreadsheet.doSomething();
}
slots:
void setA(int value) { a = value; }
void setB(int value) { b = value; }
private:
Spreadsheet spreadsheet;
int a;
int b;
};
This is completely untested but gives you an idea.
You can use the parent() method in the Spreadsheet object to get a pointer to your MainWindow.
For example,
// spreadsheet.cpp
MainWindow* mainWindow = (MainWindow*) this->parent();
mainWindow->set_a(123);
Of course, the parent object passed to Spreadsheet's constructor should be your MainWindow instance for this to work.
However, you should seriously consider oscode's suggestion, since it also points you towards creating a more Qt-like API.