On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 11:49:23 PDT Christian Ehrlicher wrote:
> >> The bug is marked as resolved in Qt 5.12.4, but, is it merged in Qt
> >> 5.13/5.13.1?>
> > Yes, fix was initially integrated in '5.12' and '5.12' is merged to '5.13'
> > from where it is then went in Qt 5.13.0 and future
Am 18.09.2019 um 14:13 schrieb Jani Heikkinen:
-Original Message-
From: Development On Behalf Of
Fausto Papandrea
Sent: keskiviikko 18. syyskuuta 2019 13.39
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Qt Release and bugfix
Good morning,
I have to update my Qt version because
On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 08:16:46 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development
wrote:
> > We've never required C++11 Standard Library. We've only required the core
> > language and the integrity compiler does support it just fine.
>
> Not really, it also fails on constexpr:
>
>
Hi,
I tried code like below and getting message:
QQmlComponent: Created graphical object was not placed in the graphics
scene.
import QtQuick 2.13
import QtQuick.Controls 2.12
import QtQuick.Window 2.13
Window {
visible: true
width: 640
height: 480
Button {
Il 18/09/19 17:07, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 03:29:39 PDT Mutz, Marc via Development wrote:
Qt 5.14 is the eighth release of Qt to require C++11. How did we get
into a situation where there's one platform that doesn't even support
basic C++11? Why wasn't it
On Wednesday, 18 September 2019 03:29:39 PDT Mutz, Marc via Development wrote:
> Qt 5.14 is the eighth release of Qt to require C++11. How did we get
> into a situation where there's one platform that doesn't even support
> basic C++11? Why wasn't it dropped when MSVC 2013 was?
We've never
Hi,
Registration to the Qt Contributors Summit 2019 (Nov 19-21th) is now open!
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/RNN7NXP
The event is open to anyone who has contributed to Qt. It is free of charge,
but requires registration so that we can do some planning. There's also a
maximum amount of people
> -Original Message-
> From: Development On Behalf Of
> Fausto Papandrea
> Sent: keskiviikko 18. syyskuuta 2019 13.39
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Qt Release and bugfix
>
> Good morning,
>
> I have to update my Qt version because of this bug
>
Il 18/09/19 13:52, Simon Hausmann ha scritto:
Since the problem seems urgent to you, do you have any suggestion what
kind of target built binary you'd add to qtbase's build coverage that
includes linkage?
Random suggestion: build (if not even *run*) the autotests?
My 2 c,
--
Giuseppe
Hi,
I'm afraid that I don't have answers to all of your questions (due to
lack of knowledge), but for some I may be able to provide insight.
Am 18.09.19 um 12:29 schrieb Mutz, Marc via Development:
> Hi,
>
> Can someone expand on the plan forward for the supported INTEGRITY
> toolchains?
>
>
Quoting https://www.ghs.com/products/compiler.html:
C++11 and C++14 support
Green Hills Compilers support ISO/IEC 14882:2011 (C++11) and
ISO/IEC 14882:2014 (C++14) which offers a number of new
language features and standard libraries. These includes
standardized threading support for mutexes,
Good morning,
I have to update my Qt version because of this bug
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-74076.
The bug is marked as resolved in Qt 5.12.4, but, is it merged in Qt
5.13/5.13.1?
What's the strategy of the release and bugfix merging?
Thank you.
Hi,
Can someone expand on the plan forward for the supported INTEGRITY
toolchains?
Lars is talking about using C++17 for Qt 6, yet the INTEGRITY version in
the CI for Qt 5.14 doesn't even support C++_11_. It's a constant pain
for anything constexpr-related, and now it turns out that while
Hi,
Okay, qt5's dev branch has now a slightly reduced configuration set and qtbase
wip/qt6 was merged to dev. So qtbase dev now has QT_VERSION set to 6.0.0.
>From this point on, I'll try to drive the merges and updates of the remaining
>modules using the new module pinning.
Simon
> On 18 Sep 2019, at 01:37, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 17 September 2019 16:05:34 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development
> wrote:
>> While I agree that at the moment it has virtually never happened, it
>> doesn't mean it couldn't happen in the future. Even today we have
>> compilers
15 matches
Mail list logo
