I'm certain that it's possible. I suspect the reason why the code used QVariant is that when it was originally written (in Qt 4.7 days, IIRC), QJSValue didn't exist, and it simply hasn't been ported to newer interfaces since then. Without knowing too much about the QML bindings in QtPIM, I am going to assume that there is at least some effort required to port all of the usages and update all of the unit tests.
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: > On quarta-feira, 28 de setembro de 2016 15:42:06 PDT Simon Hausmann wrote: > > I don't think the QVariant interface is deprecated, but it just > inherently > > unsuitable for JavaScript specific things such as distinguishing > undefined > > from null or storing function closures. That is why the engine supports > > both, for different purposes. > > Chris, is it possible to use the QJSValue interface instead? Why did the > code > use QVariant? > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
