Edit: my answer was based on the fact that you wanted to use QtQuick, but for some unknown reason, didn't want to use visual elements (ie: elements inherited from Item).
If you want a real GUI-less approach, then Alan's suggestion is the way to go: create your own set of QObject-derived classes, and use them from QML, and do not use the QtQuick module. On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Alan Alpert <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday, January 10, 2011 08:05:26 pm ext Attila Csipa wrote: >> Is it possible to have a Timer without having a visual item that brings in >> the animation timer ? Think >> >> QtObject { >> Component.onCompleted: console.log("hello world"); >> Timer { >> interval: 500; running: true; repeat: true; >> onTriggered: console.log("tick"); >> } >> } >> >> This gives somewhat cryptic Component is not ready error, but does work if >> I replace QtObject with Item. Now, you will be asking well, why don't you >> just use Item, and the answer is that it feels a bit weird - I'm >> experimenting with GUIless QML (think custom structured QtObject creation, >> textual UIs, etc). >> > > Timer is part of the QtQuick module, and that entire module is designed for > GUI creation. If you don't want a GUI, but want to use QML, then just don't > import the QtQuick module and use items from elsewhere. An example of this is > that .qmlproject files import the QmlProject module to store the project > description in QML, entirely GUI-less. > > Since non-GUI modules are not common yet, this means that you may have to > write your own Timer element which does not synchronize with the animation > Timer. > > -- > Alan Alpert > Software Engineer > Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks > _______________________________________________ > Qt-qml mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-qml > _______________________________________________ Qt-qml mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-qml
