I connect a slot with a signal. But now I want to disconnect them temporarily.
Here is part of my class declaration:
class frmMain : public QWidget
{
...
private:
QTimer *myReadTimer;
...
private slots:
void on_btnDownload_clicked();
...
};
In the constructor of frmMain, I connect myReadTimer with a slot so that ReadMyCom will be called every 5 seconds:
myReadTimer=new QTimer(this);
myReadTimer->setInterval(5000);
connect(myReadTimer,SIGNAL(timeout()),this,SLOT(ReadMyCom()));
But, in slot on_btnDownload_clicked. I don't want myReadTimer to emit any signal in on_btnDownload_clicked's scope. So I want to disconnect them at the beginning of on_btnDownload_clicked and reconnect them in the end. Like this:
void frmMain::on_btnDownload_clicked()
{
//some method to disconnect the slot & singal
...//the code that I want myReadTimer to leave me alone
//some method to reconnect the slot & singal
}
I searched in Stackoverflow and got some answer like call the QObject destructor. But I don't know how to use it.
I also tried to use disconnect, like:
QMetaObject::Connection myConnect;
myConnect=connect(myReadTimer,SIGNAL(timeout()),this,SLOT(ReadMyCom()));
...
disconnect(& myConnect);
But it still not work. So could any one help me how to do this?
There is a very nice function in QObject that comes in handy every now and again: QObject::blockSignals()
Here's a very simple fire-and-forget class that will do what you want. I take no credit for it's design, I found it on the internet somewhere a long time ago. Be careful though, it will block all signals to all objects. If this is not what you want, you can modify the class to suit your needs.
class SignalBlocker{
public:
SignalBlocker(QObject *o): object(o), alreadyBlocked(object->signalsBlocked()){
if (!alreadyBlocked){
object->blockSignals(true);
}
}
~SignalBlocker() {
if (!alreadyBlocked){
object->blockSignals(false);
}
}
private:
QObject *object;
bool alreadyBlocked;
};
Usage, in your case, becomes trivial
void frmMain::on_btnDownload_clicked()
{
SignalBlocker timerSignalBlocker(myReadTimer);
...//the code that I want myReadTimer to leave me alone
// signals automatically unblocked when the function exits
}
UPDATE:
I see that from Qt 5.3, a very similar class has been offically added to the API. It does a similar job as the one above with a slightly bigger feature-set. I suggest you use the official QSignalBlocker class instead in order to keep your codebase up-to-date with any API changes.
Usage, however, remains exactly the same.
Disconnect/reconnect syntax
There are many ways to call disconnect, depending on exactly what you want disconnected. See the QObject documentation page for an explanation of how they work.
Here's an example using 0 to mean "disconnect all slots."
void frmMain::on_btnDownload_clicked()
{
// disconnect everything connected to myReadTimer's timeout
disconnect(myReadTimer, SIGNAL(timeout()), 0, 0);
...//the code that I want myReadTimer to leave me alone
// restore the connection
connect(myReadTimer,SIGNAL(timeout()),this,SLOT(ReadMyCom()));
}
Or you can specify the exact signal-slot pair to disconnect by copying your 'connect' syntax, like this:
disconnect(myReadTimer,SIGNAL(timeout()),this,SLOT(ReadMyCom()));
Stopping the timer
Since you're working with a timer, this may be simpler:
void frmMain::on_btnDownload_clicked()
{
// stop the timer (so you won't get any timeout signals)
myReadTimer->stop();
...//the code that I want myReadTimer to leave me alone
// restart the timer (using whatever interval was set previously)
myReadTimer->start();
}
Differences from your original approach:
Since you're stopping and restarting the timer, the next time it fires will be interval after your slot function finishes.
Do you need to do anything special at all?
In a single-threaded Qt application, if you're already handling a signal, another signal won't "jump in the middle" of that code. Instead it'll be queued up as an even to handle immediately after the current slot returns.
So perhaps you don't need to stop or disconnect your timer at all.
Differences from your original approach:
If on_btnDownload_clicked takes a while to execute, you might have multiple ReadMyCom events queued up after on_btnDownload_clicked completes. (Note that at this point you'd have an operation that basically "locks up" your GUI for a while anyway; it may make more sense to refactor the function or give it its own thread.)
Related
I am going to send data collected in the QMainWindow to an object of QDialog via signal-slot connections. Here is the relevant code fragment to do this in mainwindow.cpp:
void MainWindow::on_dialogA_clicked()
{
if(dialogA==NULL) dialogA =new MyDialog();
//'this' refers to MainWindow
connect(this,SIGNAL(sendData(QVector<bool>)), dialogA, SLOT(getData(QVector<bool>)), Qt::QueuedConnection);
dialogA->show();
}
However when working with dialogA, it seems that the data are not updated properly and the dialog interface becomes Not responding after while. I wonder if the signal-slot connection above is right or not, or that is the way to have data communication with a QDiaglog.
Two things...first, switch to the modern method of creating signal/slot connections:
connect (this, &MainWindow::sendData, dialogA, &MyDialog::getData, Qt::QueuedConnection);
If there's something wrong with the definition, using this format allows the compiler to catch it rather than a run-time warning. Assuming the parameters are defined correctly, there's nothing wrong with the "connect" statement except that it's in the wrong place, which is the second issue.
Every time the user clicks, an additional connection is being made between your main window and the dialog. Qt doesn't automatically ensure that only one connection is made between a given signal and slot. It'll create as many as you ask it for. The "connect" call should be part of the "if" block:
if (! dialogA)
{
dialogA =new MyDialog();
connect...
}
Depending on how much data is in that vector and what the dialog does with it, if you click enough times, it may be that you're just processing the data so many times that everything slows down tremendously.
I have a class derived from QThread: class MyClass : public QThread. In the run method I have "my own" message loop:
run() {
// exec(); // while not reached
while (_runMessageLoop && ...) {
hr = CallDispatch(.....);
if (hr== 0) QThread::msleep(100);
// QCoreApplication::processEvents(); // Does not work
}
}
Since exec() is not executed, I have no Qt event loop. This obviously causes signal / slots not to work correctly. Is there any chance to combine the Qt and my own message loop? Or do I need a frequently firing timer in order to do what I have accomplished in my infinite loop?
The right way "Qt-wise" is to use a timer and let Qt manage the event loop.
If you need to depend on external things, you can use things like QAbstractSocket to send events when data comes in over an external socket, eg.
This is not really the answer for implementing the event loop correctly, I'm fairly sure there is a way, but more of a workaround:
Start the thread normally, exec() and all, and connect the start signal to a slot (make sure it gets called in the right thread), then put your loop there, and call Qt's processEvents() in that loop. That makes sure Qt event loop gets properly set up.
Debugging signals and slots can be hard, because the debugger does not jump to the slots of a signal when it is emitted. What are some best practices for debugging Qt signals and slots?
In particular
How do I make sure connections are set up successfully?
When should I use signals and slots, when should I avoid them?
What are the most efficient debugging techniques from your experience?
There was a blog post written a while back called 20 ways to debug Qt signals and slots
It addresses I think #1 and #3 of your questions.
For #2, I don't think there is really a hard and fast reason to use or not use signals/slots, as they are a pretty core concept of the GUI framework. Signals are a perfect way to decouple the knowledge of one component to another, allowing you to design reusable widgets that simply declare state changes or notifications. It is also a very good way to communicate GUI changes from non-GUI thread loops, by emitting a signal that the main thread can see.
There might be times where what you really want instead of a signal/slot is to use events, such as when a parent widget should become the event filter for a number of child widgets. The children still do not need to know about the parent, and the parent gets a more direct event as opposed to a signal connection.
On the same topic of events, there are times where what you really want is a bubbling up of an event from child -> parent -> grandparent -> etc. Signals would make less sense here because they are not meant as a way to determine whether the proposed event should result in an action (they could be used this way obviously). Events allow you to check the current state, decide whether this widget should do anything, or otherwise bubble them up the chain for someone else to inspect.
There is a really fantastic answer about The Difference Between Signals/Slots and Events. Here is a good snippet:
You "handle" events
You "get notified of" signal emissions
What I like about that quote is that it describes the different need case. If you need to handle an action in a widget, then you probable want an event. If you want to be notified of things happening, then you probably want a signal.
In addition to what have been said, here are additional tricks.
If you use QTest for your unit tests, then you can pass -vs argument to the executable and all signals will be shown in the console.
I looked at how QTest works, and it registers callbacks that is triggered when signal and slots are executed using QSignalDumper class. However, this API is not exported and might break any time. Here is how I was able to hook on all signals and slots on Linux with Qt 5.10 using GCC.
// QSignalSpyCallbackSet is defined in qt5/qtbase/src/corelib/kernel/qobject_p.h
struct QSignalSpyCallbackSet
{
typedef void (*BeginCallback)(QObject *caller, int signal_or_method_index, void **argv);
typedef void (*EndCallback)(QObject *caller, int signal_or_method_index);
BeginCallback signal_begin_callback,
slot_begin_callback;
EndCallback signal_end_callback,
slot_end_callback;
};
typedef void (*register_spy_callbacks)(const QSignalSpyCallbackSet &callback_set);
static void showObject(QObject *caller, int signal_index, const QString &msg)
{
const QMetaObject *metaObject = caller->metaObject();
QMetaMethod member = metaObject->method(signal_index);
qDebug() << msg << metaObject->className() << qPrintable(member.name());
}
static void onSignalBegin(QObject *caller, int signal_index, void **argv)
{
showObject(caller, signal_index, "onSignalBegin");
}
static void onSlotBegin(QObject *caller, int signal_index, void **argv)
{
showObject(caller, signal_index, "onSlotBegin");
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
static QSignalSpyCallbackSet set = { onSignalBegin, onSlotBegin, 0, 0 };
QLibrary qtcore("libQt5Core");
register_spy_callbacks reg = (register_spy_callbacks)qtcore.resolve("_Z32qt_register_signal_spy_callbacksRK21QSignalSpyCallbackSet");
if (reg) {
reg(set);
}
...
}
I believe that Qt should expose that API, because we could use it for so many things beyond debugging, such as monitoring the time spent in a slot, get statistics, etc.
How do I make sure connections are set up successfully?
You will see warnings in the console output from your application for each failed connection.
When should I use signals and slots, when should I avoid them?
In my opinion, it's fine to use them any time you want to maintain separation of concerns in your class design. Your class can emit a signal that may or may not be answered by another class (or classes) completely unknown to your class. This keeps your coupling down.
What are the most efficient debugging techniques from your experience?
I can't really add anything more than what is said on this blog post. 20 ways to debug Qt signals and slots
Regarding #1, I'll just add another piece of information that I didn't see mentioned above or in the referenced blog post.
From the documentation on QObject::connect():
Creates a connection of the given type from the signal in the sender object to the method in the receiver object. Returns true if the connection succeeds; otherwise returns false.
I prefer asserting the return value of my connection to make sure the connection succeeded, especially because not all Qt programs will have console output. This also leads to more easily maintainable code, as it will catch changes made at a later date to either the signal or the slot, and force the programmer who made the changes to update the connections as well.
I'm working with QThread and slots/signals mechanism; I know there's a lot of threads about this on the Web in general and here at SO in particular, but I still could not find a solution. Anyway, here is the context.
The piece of code I am trying to come up with is aimed at controlling though the GUI an eventually long process, hence the use of a QThread.
I have a window with two buttons, start and stop. My Window also has a QThread and Task, where the latter inherits from a QObject. I do want to be able to stop my task while it is running, and to prevent starting it again if start is clicked while it is already running.
Here is an excerpt of Task (which fakes the long process):
class Task: public QObject
{
public:
Task(): QObject(), stop_(true) {}
private slots:
void startTask()
{
stop_ = false;
run();
}
void stopTask()
{
stop_ = true;
}
void run() const
{
while ( ! stop_)
{
sleep(1);
}
}
bool stop_;
};
I made two connections between the buttons and the task in the constructor of my Window:
class Window: public QWidget
{
public:
Window()
{
// Instantiate buttons and put them in a layout.
// ...
connect(buttonStart_, SIGNAL(clicked()), &task_, SLOT(startTask()));
connect(buttonStop_, SIGNAL(clicked()), &task_, SLOT(stopTask()),
Qt::DirectConnection);
task_.moveToThread(&thread);
thread_.start();
}
private:
QPushButton buttonStart_;
QPushButton buttonStop_;
QThread thread_;
Task task_;
};
I used Qt::DirectConnection in the second connect() in order to "force" processing of my signal requesting to stop the task, as (as I understand) task_ needs to return from its work before processing events further (if I use the default connection, all my clicks are processed after my task is "done").
Here, the Qt::DirectConnection "bypasses" the event queue, and that way I can stop my task. But to be honest I don't know if that is the proper way to do it, or if it is a workaround (thus possibly the root of my problem).
Anyway, this works OK that way, but when I start playing with my buttons, the GUI gets eventually frozen, and that's my problem!
Any help is welcome; thanks for your time!
Using a DirectConnection means that the slots will be executed in the UI thread (while your task thread is still running). This is not what you want. The way to handle this is to use an event loop in your thread, by running with QThread::exec().
In order for your thread to be able to respond as you want, you will need to ensure that the thread is able to process incoming events. There are a few ways to deal with this. One would be to call QCoreApplication::processEvents() occasionally while your task is running. Another is to use a QTimer connected to a slot which performs some processing. The important thing is to make sure that the event loop in your thread can run.
The first thing you need to understand is which thread your signal/slot connections are being executed in.
The default behavior in this particular case is to use a Qt::QueuedConnection, which will put your signal event onto the receiving thread's event queue. In the case of a Qt::DirectConnection, the slot is executed in the thread of the object that emitted the signal.
Using a Qt::DirectConnection would only be safe in this instance if you put a mutex around your stop_ variable to prevent both threads from accessing it at the same time.
here's the code of my problem
class Base : QThread
{
Q_OBJECT
virtual void run() = 0;
signals:
void Ping(int);
};
class Derived : public Base
{
void run()
{
emit Ping(42);
}
}
the signal(42) won't reach/call to slots. what's wrong?
thanks in advance.
Did that 100 times, it does work. Are you sure your base class is properly MOC'ed ? (i.e. defined in a file contained in HEADERS section of .pro) Also when connecting your signal, check the return status of QObject::connect (it's a boolean). A good practice is something like that
bool r=false;
r=QObject::connect(pObj1,SIGNAL(signalStuff()),pObj2,SLOT(gotStuff()));
Q_ASSERT(r);
As Liz noticed, if something went wrong in your connect, you can check the traces to know what happened.
I can also note :
you don't have to redefine run in your base class, it's already defined by QThread
Common pitfall with QThread: Base class and Derived class belong to the thread which created them, not in the newly created thread
you don't connect your signal to any slot in your sample, so it won't trigger anything (I suppose it's done elsewhere)
your class Derived lacks the final ;
EDIT:
Edited to take into account liz' interesting comment.
I came upon the same problem but managed to find solution. The problem in my case wasnt the inheritance (even tho i did emit from derived class).
The problem was the code calling emit signal was execute BEFORE the code connecting signal with slot. Therefor both signal was emitted and signal-slot connection worked fine, but the code in the slot wasnt executed because emit happened before connecting the slot to signal.
Maybe that helps someone in the future.
I think you are trying to connect signal and slot from different threads.
Did you read this article?