On Thu, 17 May 2018 at 10:25, Christian Kandeler <christian.kande...@qt.io>
wrote:

> On Wed, 16 May 2018 18:01:40 +0200
> Federico Frenguelli <synas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > If functions were properly supported as properties, there'd be a simple
> > > generic solution:
> > >
> > > AutotestRunner {
> > >     additionalArgsFunc: function(testArtifact)  {
> > >         var myArgs = [];
> > >         var additionalImportPaths =
> > > testArtifact.quickpaths.additionalImportPaths;
> > >         for (var i in additionalImportPaths)
> > >              myArgs.push("-import", additionalImportPaths[i]);
> > >         return myArgs;
> > >     })
> > > }
> > >
> > > In fact, I think this is already possible, though the implementation
> (on
> > > the AutotestRunner side) would look rather awful, involving eval().
> > > So maybe that's the way to go? Higher-level concepts might not be
> flexible
> > > enough. For instance, the approach sketched above also allows you to
> get
> > > the necessary information from product or project properties, or even
> from
> > > the environment.
> > >
> >
> >  That could be a clear and flexible solution but is it possible to use
> > function properties? Or you were thinking of wrapping the function
> > definition in a string??
>
> I think it can work like this already, using a variant property.
>

I tried to test your proposal but unfortunately that syntax is not
supported. Is it possible to access a product's properties from the
artifact?

-- 
Federico Frenguelli
_______________________________________________
Qbs mailing list
Qbs@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs

Reply via email to