Max Samukha Wrote: > On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 03:55:58 +0900, Bill Baxter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 3:28 AM, Max Samukha > ><[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 13:06:46 -0500, Eldar Insafutdinov > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>>Finally we managed to compile qtd for Windows. But at the very last step > >>>when compiling example, optlink crashed with a messagebox containing X86 > >>>registers content. This seems to be a blocker for qtd working on windows.. > >> > >> This may be related to the famous > >> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=424, though we don't > >> make extensive use of templates. > > > >It can also happen because of a single very large file. Perhaps one > >created by some sort of automatic code generation. Anything like that > >in qtd? > > > >--bb > > Yes, all modules are autogenerated. You are right, we probably should > think about splitting up that big file. For example, by placing enum > definitions into a separate module. It is still a less preferred > solution because it requires more tweaking of the original code > generator, which is already messy.
The reason why is this file is big is in this bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=282 And I don't thing that placing enums outside the class is a good idea, because enums will be exposed to global namespace unlike original Qt version. I have just checked, if enum A belongs to qt.core.Qt module you can't access it like Qt.A - which means that we have to keep that file big until this bug is fixed.
