Make signal connections dialog method picker respect bind/unbind #92465
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
akien-mga
changed the title
KoBeWi
approved these changes
Jun 3, 2024
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR makes the signal connection dialog respect bind/unbind setup when picking filtered methods (compatible search)
Previously the "select method" dialog only consider the signal method, which will result in a wrong set of methods to choose if bind/unbind is used.
For example a signal without argument, but with bind argument setting to int:
In this case the valid target function signature should have a argument of type int
before:
the editor still shows a list of methods without argument
after this PR:
correctly filter out the valid functions
note that when unbind is also used, bind setup will be ignored (this is in sync with the current behavior of the editor).
if this proposal is implemented then the filter behavior can be adjusted easily.
Also a side note: this PR does NOT fixes #84058
I intended to but after inspection I found that is because custom classes do not appear in ClassDB so the object parent check will be rejected, I failed to find an obvious way to fix that currently.