ITT: bloated reinvent the wheel garbage

How so? Wasn't it always possible to just override the () operator? And even if not, you could just use any other function name. It's not like the user ever directly calls this code.

>yeah but it's 90s bloat like winamp which means like 20 mb
Im-fucking-plying. Qt5 is like 4 gigabytes.

Yes, but that would have been cumbersome to have to make a new class for that each time. The point of signals and slots is to bind arbitrary QObject methods to each other.

It works fine.
That is normal size for toolkit dev

Attached: as per description in OP.jpg (700x454, 21K)

imagine using a fucking FOOT

But then it could have been solved via a vector of member function pointers, even though the syntax would have been dreadful, right?

Sort of, in Qt it's actually a linked list, see this file: github.com/qt/qtbase/blob/5.12/src/corelib/kernel/qobject_p.h
It also supports binding signals/slots by string id. These string to method mappings are generated moc at compile time and are still not possible in base C++ without adding ugly macros to your class.

>matching methods aka things called often and frequently to a string
>in a linked list
muh tism hurts

No, that's not how it works. The matching is done before insertion. It's a linked list because connecting and disconnecting signals should not be worse than O(1).