Merge lp:~aacid/qmenumodel/aboutToShow into lp:qmenumodel
| Status: | Merged | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Approved by: | Charles Kerr on 2017-03-16 | ||||
| Approved revision: | 132 | ||||
| Merged at revision: | 130 | ||||
| Proposed branch: | lp:~aacid/qmenumodel/aboutToShow | ||||
| Merge into: | lp:qmenumodel | ||||
| Diff against target: |
96 lines (+51/-2) 3 files modified
debian/changelog (+7/-0) libqmenumodel/src/unitymenumodel.cpp (+42/-1) libqmenumodel/src/unitymenumodel.h (+2/-1) |
||||
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~aacid/qmenumodel/aboutToShow | ||||
| Related bugs: |
|
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Charles Kerr (community) | 2017-03-06 | Approve on 2017-03-16 | |
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Commit Message
Call about to show for those items that have a qtubuntu-tag property
Description of the Change
- 130. By Albert Astals Cid on 2017-03-07
-
Increase version because of new api
| Albert Astals Cid (aacid) wrote : | # |
I will add all those auto, but those are *totally* not on the style of the rest of the file, basically the file has 0 auto variables.
> You probably meant to use -1 here to use the default timeout? I'm not sure what specifying a timeout of 0msec would do but it's probably not good
No, I don't want the default timeout, i simply want no timeout, it either works or doesn't, i don't see why it's "probably not good" to use a 0 timeout
> Not a blocker, but want to confirm that you meant to not provide a callback here so that you can log any errors reported by g_dbus_
Yes, if you want I can add error reporting, but don't think it's going to give us much tbh.
- 131. By Albert Astals Cid on 2017-03-16
-
Review improvements
| Charles Kerr (charlesk) wrote : | # |
> I will add all those auto, but those are *totally* not on the style of the
> rest of the file, basically the file has 0 auto variables.
No worries, as I said those were trivial comments. Redundant type info
is bad, but inconsistency is also bad, pick your minor poison :)
> > You probably meant to use -1 here to use the default timeout? I'm not sure
> what specifying a timeout of 0msec would do but it's probably not good
> No, I don't want the default timeout, i simply want no timeout, it either
> works or doesn't, i don't see why it's "probably not good" to use a 0 timeout
Because the docs say use G_MAXINT for no timeout.
g_dbus_
The timeout is applied in g_dbus_
which reads:
if (timeout_msec != G_MAXINT)
{
data-
g_
g_
}
I /think/ you are effectively asking the call to timeout asap.
> > Not a blocker, but want to confirm that you meant to not provide a callback
> here so that you can log any errors reported by
> g_dbus_
> Yes, if you want I can add error reporting, but don't think it's going to give
> us much tbh.
Agreed that it's minor.
Keeping as NF for the G_MAXINT issue
- 132. By Albert Astals Cid on 2017-03-16
-
0 -> G_MAXINT as found by Charles

comments inline