Re: [Development] Future of QBS

16.10.2017, 16:17, "Adam Treat" : > You'll need a strongly normalizing language for that which does not > allow general recursion. Something built on the simply typed lambda > calculus, but with added syntactic sugar would do. Maybe Prolog would do it too. >> >>  Ulf >>  

Re: [Development] Future of QBS

16.10.2017, 16:08, "Ulf Hermann" : >>  I have no real experience with Meson, but at least it has following >> advantages: >> >>  * Its language is typed(!), has native support for arrays(!), and >> functions/methods have >>  first-class return values(!) >>  * Its language

Re: [Development] Future of QBS

16.10.2017, 15:06, "Kevin Kofler" : > Tobias Hunger wrote: >>  I am still missing a comparison of qbs and *current* build system options. >>  All I see is qbs vs. qmake and qbs vs. cmake 2.x. Neither qmake nor cmake >>  is what qbs will be competing with by the time it is

Re: [Development] Future of QBS

16.10.2017, 13:59, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru>: > 15.10.2017, 12:20, "Christian Gagneraud" <chg...@gmail.com>: >>  On 14 October 2017 at 04:22, Jean-Michaël Celerier >>  <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>  

Re: [Development] Future of QBS

15.10.2017, 12:20, "Christian Gagneraud" : > On 14 October 2017 at 04:22, Jean-Michaël Celerier > wrote: >>>  nobody is going to port Qt to CMake (if you disagree start a new thread) >> >>  https://plus.google.com/+AaronSeigo/posts/fWAM9cJggc8 >

Re: [Development] Future of QBS

16.10.2017, 10:31, "Jake Petroules" : >>  On Oct 16, 2017, at 4:42 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> >>  Christian Gagneraud wrote: >>>  I would resume this post as "I love CMake, CMake is the only way. >>>  You're all wrong." >>>  This post doesn't

Re: [Development] Future of QBS

16.10.2017, 05:43, "Kevin Kofler" : > Christian Gagneraud wrote: >>  I would resume this post as "I love CMake, CMake is the only way. >>  You're all wrong." >>  This post doesn't explain anything, doesn't gives any analysis, no >>  comparison, no argument whatsoever,

Re: [Development] Nominating Kevin Funk for Maintainer qtbase/Build Systems/CMake

13.10.2017, 23:37, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Friday, 13 October 2017 12:30:59 PDT André Pönitz wrote: >>  Hi all. >> >>  I would like to nominate Kevin Funk for Maintainer of the >>  Build Systems/CMake area. >> >>  Kevin is effectively doing the job today. > > +1 from

Re: [Development] Speeding up the review process (was: PostgreSQL cross compile for Pi)

13.10.2017, 14:05, "Viktor Engelmann" : > On the [Interest] mailing list there was a discussion about the > review-process taking to long and we also had multiple discussions about that > at the world summit. I have complained about this myself, so I would like to >

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 CoAP session notes

10.10.2017, 13:10, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 11:59:07 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  10.10.2017, 12:50, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: >>  > On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 1

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 CoAP session notes

10.10.2017, 12:59, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru>: > 10.10.2017, 12:50, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: >>  On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 11:48:02 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>>   > We would like to have CBOR suppor

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 CoAP session notes

10.10.2017, 12:50, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 11:48:02 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  > We would like to have CBOR support in QtCore. >> >>  If you do this, please support stringref extension: >>

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 CoAP session notes

10.10.2017, 12:43, "Thiago Macieira" : > == CoAP Client == > > * Contribution consists of CoAP client > ** Supports PUT/GET/POST/DELETE > *** Not yet FETCH/PATCH (RFC 8132) > ** Supports Blockwise transfer > ** Supports Notification (QCoapReply::notified signal, >

Re: [Development] Repository request: HTTP server

06.10.2017, 20:12, "Jason H" : >>  Hi all, >> >>  We have recently been working on a research project looking into the >> possibilities for creating a lightweight server component that can easily >> enable Qt applications to serve over HTTP. We would like to make this work >>

Re: [Development] Needing another advise using git

04.10.2017, 20:29, "Daniel Savi" : > Thank you all for the helpful comments on my previous message. > > I think that I have now managed to amend my changes into one commit and > may understand how to react on comments. > > While amending my commits I must somehow have

Re: [Development] QRandomGenerator and boot times

19.09.2017, 13:14, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru>: > 14.09.2017, 10:22, "Sami Nurmenniemi" <sami.nurmenni...@qt.io>: >>  Hi, >> >>  Commit 120ecc976fc3d5504d234702f68c2ad3898b77a4 changes default behavior of >> QRandomGener

Re: [Development] QRandomGenerator and boot times

14.09.2017, 10:22, "Sami Nurmenniemi" : > Hi, > > Commit 120ecc976fc3d5504d234702f68c2ad3898b77a4 changes default behavior of > QRandomGenerator to use getentropy instead of /dev/urandom. This causes > problems for device boot times when using QRandomGenerator in the

Re: [Development] std::allocate_shared for QSharedPointer

13.09.2017, 04:40, "Ed Leaver" : > What??? You mean there's actually a reason people aren't knocking the doors > down over these things? =-O > > A few months ago I was handed a C++ Coding Standard that deigned to prohibit > any further heap allocation after program

Re: [Development] std::allocate_shared for QSharedPointer

Don't challenge your allocator, just use intrusive reference counting (e.g. QSharedData) 12.09.2017, 03:45, "Ed Leaver" : > Have any of you experience with jemalloc or TCMalloc? > http://goog-perftools.sourceforge.net/doc/tcmalloc.html > > On 09/10/2017 08:26 AM, Thiago

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

07.09.2017, 10:45, "Martin Koller" <kol...@aon.at>: > On Donnerstag, 27. Juli 2017 16:13:05 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  27.07.2017, 16:41, "Martin Koller" <kol...@aon.at>: >>  > On Dienstag, 25. Juli 2017 14:20:28 CEST Konstantin Tokarev w

Re: [Development] [fix]: Assistant (and others) burning CPU because of #f27d1ccbb24ec2fd4098f2976503478831006cc8 ?

31.08.2017, 16:48, "René J. V. Bertin" : > Sergio Martins wrote: > >>  Interesting way such as LTTNG/ETW :) ? > > Spoiler alert: not on Mac ... Mac has DTrace > > R. > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org

Re: [Development] Qt and IoT infographic

29.08.2017, 19:00, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Tuesday, 29 August 2017 02:43:44 PDT Shawn Rutledge wrote: >>  And yet it has a web server for serving up either a human-readable page or >>  JSON on demand, and it also pushes data to a central server periodically. > > Is

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

17.08.2017, 18:17, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On Thursday, 17 August 2017 08:12:23 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  Altrernatively, you can drop qtwebkit sources on the same level with other >>  Qt modules, however it will break if you cu

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

17.08.2017, 18:06, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Thursday, 17 August 2017 07:24:05 PDT Martin Koller wrote: >>  Hi, >> >>  is the 5.212 branch now as integrated in Qt as it was before in Qt 5.5 in >>  the way that I can build Qt with webkit support so that the help system

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

27.07.2017, 16:41, "Martin Koller" <kol...@aon.at>: > On Dienstag, 25. Juli 2017 14:20:28 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > >>  >> You can compile with GCC 4.8 if IndexedDB and FTL JIT are disabled. >> However this brings a >>  >> degradation

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

24.07.2017, 08:33, "Martin Koller" <kol...@aon.at>: > On Sonntag, 23. Juli 2017 23:45:30 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  23.07.2017, 23:49, "Martin Koller" <kol...@aon.at>: >>  > On Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 17:03:50 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

23.07.2017, 23:49, "Martin Koller" <kol...@aon.at>: > On Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 17:03:50 CEST Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > >>  I'm not sure it would be acceptable, because updated QtWebKit requires full >>  C++11 support in the compiler (gcc >= 4.9, 4.8 poss

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9's new garbage collector documentation? + root_ptr

14.07.2017, 10:18, "Thiago Macieira" : > On quinta-feira, 13 de julho de 2017 17:32:58 PDT Phil Bouchard wrote: >>  You just helped me figure something out: people want speed, right? >> >>  - You offer a service which converts and compiles all Javascript files >>  for

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9's new garbage collector documentation? + root_ptr

13.07.2017, 02:39, "Phil Bouchard" <philipp...@gmail.com>: > On 07/12/2017 07:25 PM, Phil Bouchard wrote: >>  On 07/12/2017 04:56 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>>  Now add time of compilation to the sum >> >>  So I just did benchmark the following

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9's new garbage collector documentation? + root_ptr

12.07.2017, 22:35, "Phil Bouchard" <philipp...@gmail.com>: > Phil Bouchard <philipp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>  On 07/11/2017 06:36 AM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>>  10.07.2017, 21:56, "Phil Bouchard" <philipp...@gmail.com>: >>>>

Re: [Development] Qt-AES - Looking for comments

12.07.2017, 19:36, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On quarta-feira, 12 de julho de 2017 09:26:52 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  12.07.2017, 19:21, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: >>  > On quarta-fe

Re: [Development] Qt-AES - Looking for comments

12.07.2017, 19:21, "Thiago Macieira" : > On quarta-feira, 12 de julho de 2017 07:52:20 PDT Matteo wrote: >>  At the beginning this was for my own personal use as I was in need of some >>  sort of encryption for a work project without using openssl, then I just >>  

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9's new garbage collector documentation? + root_ptr

10.07.2017, 21:56, "Phil Bouchard" : > Phil Bouchard wrote: >>  BTW converting Javascript into C++ seems very easy to do > > In fact, is it me or it would seem that: > - converting the Javascript code into C++ on-the-fly > - compiling the resulting

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9's new garbage collector documentation? + root_ptr

11.07.2017, 07:52, "Phil Bouchard" : > On 07/10/2017 05:08 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>  On segunda-feira, 10 de julho de 2017 11:56:07 PDT Phil Bouchard wrote: >>>  Phil Bouchard wrote:  BTW converting Javascript into C++ seems very easy to do

Re: [Development] How is Quick Controls 2 deployment meant to be ?

08.07.2017, 21:01, "Massimo Callegari via Development" : > On Sat, Jul 08, 2017 at 11:24:56AM +, Massimo Callegari via Development > wrote: > >>>  2) Security ? There is none. If you deploy an application using a >>> TextField control with >>>  echoMode:

Re: [Development] Problems building qtwebkit in 5.9.1

14.06.2017, 12:49, "Harald Vistnes" : > Hi, > > Has there been a change in the dependencies for qtwebkit in 5.9.1? I am not > able to build it anymore. > > I am using these commands: > > ... > perl init-repository >

Re: [Development] Dropping older compilers for Qt 5.10 (was: Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries)

08.06.2017, 01:11, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On quarta-feira, 7 de junho de 2017 13:30:30 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  FWIW, the first really C++11 complete version of GCC is 4.9, 4.8 still has a >>  number of bugs that result in intern

Re: [Development] [Releasing] Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries

07.06.2017, 23:09, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Tuesday, 6 June 2017 23:57:10 PDT Jani Heikkinen wrote: >>  Hi all, >> >>  There has been discussion ongoing about 5.10 supported platforms and CI >>  configurations. What we haven't agreed yet is Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries.

Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?

05.06.2017, 17:20, "Jason H" : >>  Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM >>  From: "Lorn Potter" >>  To: development@qt-project.org >>  Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web? >> >>  On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote: >>  > While Qt is not a

Re: [Development] QNumericVector?

02.06.2017, 19:55, "Jason H" : > I'm just wondering out loud if it would be a good thing to have a numeric > vector type that supports math operations (and optionally will SIMD > accelerate them). Qt supports some fixed dimensionality vectors (QVecorXD, > x={2,3,4}). But this

Re: [Development] Blacklisting: CI vs non-CI

26.05.2017, 09:45, "Thiago Macieira" : > I've seen some blacklists, in the past, that were real flaky tests: things > that > would be unstable on any machine, given the proper conditions. > > But most of the recent blacklists, and certainly all the BPASS I see when I

Re: [Development] QList

25.05.2017, 02:19, "Ville Voutilainen" <ville.voutilai...@gmail.com>: > On 24 May 2017 at 22:25, Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> wrote: >>  On 2017-05-24 15:12, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>>  24.05.2017, 15:49, "NIkolai Marchenko" <enmarant

Re: [Development] QList

type > "(don't laugh) and "looks like a default container by simplicity of its name" > (again, don't laugh, I am just outlining potential problems with new users) > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru> wrote: > >> 24.05

Re: [Development] QList

24.05.2017, 15:49, "NIkolai Marchenko" : > A semi-sane idea that I think no one has suggested yet: > > What if, starting from Qt6, QList becomes a wrapper for QArrayList with a > contructor from this type? > After all making existing code slightly _slower_ because of

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

11.05.2017, 16:10, "Oswald Buddenhagen" : > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:53:26AM +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote: >> Oswald Buddenhagen (4 May 2017 18:35) >> > i'll say outright that you can't be part of the qt supermodule and yet >> > have independent releases.

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

  08.05.2017, 15:11, "Lars Knoll" <lars.kn...@qt.io>: On 5 May 2017, at 13:15, Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru> wrote: 05.05.2017, 10:04, "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turu...@qt.io>:Hi,There has also been some interest also for getting Qt WebEngine to

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

>>> From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io@qt- >>> project.org] On Behalf Of Konstantin Tokarev >>> Sent: maanantaina 8. toukokuuta 2017 12.56 >>> To: Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turu...@qt.io>; Oswald Buddenhagen >>> <oswald.buddenha.

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

05.05.2017, 14:15, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru>: > 05.05.2017, 10:04, "Tuukka Turunen" <tuukka.turu...@qt.io>: >>  Hi, >> >>  There has also been some interest also for getting Qt WebEngine to be >> released much faster

Re: [Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

07.05.2017, 22:43, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On Sunday, 7 May 2017 12:26:02 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  I'm doing embedded software development, and wouldn't even consider >>  including emulated builds into my pipeline. > > Then

Re: [Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

07.05.2017, 19:24, "Thiago Macieira" : > On Sunday, 7 May 2017 03:20:26 PDT Ville Voutilainen wrote: >>  On 6 May 2017 at 22:48, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>  > Second, compiling to ARM requires cross-compilation. Since the problem >>  >

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

t (e.g., Ubuntu 14.04). This is why question about version numbers and related stuff is important. If this is not done, it doesn't matter at all whatever tag names will be picked and what schedules will be followed. > > Yours, > > Tuukka > > On 04/05/2017, 22.26, "Devel

Re: [Development] abi breakage for qtwebengine libraries in 5.9

05.05.2017, 13:29, "Sergio Martins" : > On 2017-05-05 11:00, Michal Klocek wrote: >>  Hi >> >>  With 5.8.0 we released web engine libs which export operator new , >>  new[] , delete, delete[] globally, unfortunately the issue was not >>  spotted in time. >> >>  

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

> > Tuukka > > On 04/05/2017, 22.26, "Development on behalf of Konstantin Tokarev" > <development-bounces+tuukka.turunen=qt...@qt-project.org on behalf of > annu...@yandex.ru> wrote: > > 04.05.2017, 19:35, "Oswald Buddenhagen" <osw

Re: [Development] Coin: using 64-bit Windows host for 32-bit builds

05.05.2017, 01:11, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > Em quinta-feira, 4 de maio de 2017, às 14:22:55 PDT, Konstantin Tokarev > escreveu: >>  Unfortunately, VS is the worst offender at the moment, it does not have >>  anything like -g1, or like -g0

Re: [Development] Coin: using 64-bit Windows host for 32-bit builds

05.05.2017, 00:01, "Kevin Kofler" <kevin.kof...@chello.at>: > Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  It is needed because large projects, namely QtWebEngine and QtWebKit >>  (wip/next branch) are too large for making 32-bit debug builds on 32-bit >>  OS. In case of

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

04.05.2017, 19:35, "Oswald Buddenhagen" <oswald.buddenha...@qt.io>: > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 04:51:45PM +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  03.05.2017, 17:27, "Sergio Martins" <sergio.mart...@kdab.com>: >>  > On 2017-05-03 15:02, Ko

Re: [Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

04.05.2017, 21:07, "René J. V. Bertin" : > Thiago Macieira wrote: > >>  I think our ARM builds are little-endian, so endianness cannot be an issue. >> >>  The problem happens before any ARM code is run, so it's not an emulation or >>  processor issue. It must be a

[Development] Coin: using 64-bit Windows host for 32-bit builds

Hello, I was told that there is some ongoing work to make subject possible. What is the current status? It is needed because large projects, namely QtWebEngine and QtWebKit (wip/next branch) are too large for making 32-bit debug builds on 32-bit OS. In case of QtWebKit it's possbile to work

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

04.05.2017, 17:17, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > Em quinta-feira, 4 de maio de 2017, às 06:51:45 PDT, Konstantin Tokarev > escreveu: >>  I'm leaning towards "6.0.0" number, because it's larger than any 5.x and >>  makes it clear

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes - SUMMARY

04.05.2017, 16:53, "Thiago Macieira" : > Em quinta-feira, 4 de maio de 2017, às 00:23:46 PDT, Heikki Halmet escreveu: >>  Clang 4: Do we really need this to be tested with Linux in CI? If yes, then >>  which configuration it will be replaced? > > I don't think we need

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

04.05.2017, 16:52, "Thiago Macieira" : > Em quinta-feira, 4 de maio de 2017, às 00:17:30 PDT, Jani Heikkinen escreveu: >>  > I hope for this (if possible, in 5.9 with Technology preview status >> >>  I don't think adding new TP in 5.9 at this point isn't that wise

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

03.05.2017, 17:27, "Sergio Martins" <sergio.mart...@kdab.com>: > On 2017-05-03 15:02, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  Remaining question is versioning. While it's fine to dub current >>  release "5.9" (but not 5.0, because we will have another WebKit

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

03.05.2017, 21:25, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > Em quarta-feira, 3 de maio de 2017, às 10:55:49 PDT, Konstantin Tokarev > escreveu: >>  So, do you think we should update 5.6 branch of QtWebKit with wip/next >>  contents, fix qmake w

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

03.05.2017, 20:44, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > Em quarta-feira, 3 de maio de 2017, às 08:03:50 PDT, Konstantin Tokarev > escreveu: >>  I'm not sure it would be acceptable, because updated QtWebKit requires full >>  C++11 support in the

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

ab.com> > wrote: >> On 2017-05-03 15:02, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >> Remaining question is versioning. While it's fine to dub current >> release "5.9" (but not 5.0, because we will have another WebKit update >> in 5.10 time frame), using Qt versions in QtWebK

Re: [Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

03.05.2017, 17:27, "Sergio Martins" <sergio.mart...@kdab.com>: > On 2017-05-03 15:02, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  Remaining question is versioning. While it's fine to dub current >>  release "5.9" (but not 5.0, because we will have another WebKit

[Development] QtWebKit is coming back (part 2)

Hi all, A lot of time has passed since original thread [1]. Lots of work was done since then, and it took much more time than what I've originally planned, however I think now we can use updated QtWebKit as a full replacement of our previous branch that didn't have updates of WebKit engine

Re: [Development] Setting CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH to Qt prefix breaks use of system ICU via CMake

29.04.2017, 23:18, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On Saturday, 29 April 2017 06:22:20 -03 Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  > Out of scope and you should be using qmake. >> >>  I understand your point, but it seems impractical to provide w

Re: [Development] Setting CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH to Qt prefix breaks use of system ICU via CMake

28.04.2017, 18:58, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On Friday, 28 April 2017 11:54:53 -03 Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  Hello, >> >>  There is a strange situation involving official Qt SDK (>=5.8.0) binaries >>  for Linux, ICU, cmake

[Development] Setting CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH to Qt prefix breaks use of system ICU via CMake

Hello, There is a strange situation involving official Qt SDK (>=5.8.0) binaries for Linux, ICU, cmake, and WebKit project files, I'm not sure which side really needs to be fixed. (Qt)WebKit uses custom module to find ICU, you can see its code at [1]. Module uses quite popular practise of

Re: [Development] QList

26.04.2017, 08:04, "Marc Mutz" : > On 2017-04-25 23:04, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>  On Tuesday, 25 April 2017 17:49:16 -03 Alejandro Exojo wrote: >>>  On Tuesday 25 April 2017 16:35:01 Thiago Macieira wrote: >>>  > QVector and QList don't have the same API. They're slightly

Re: [Development] QCOMPARE & mixed types

21.04.2017, 13:45, "Milian Wolff" : > On Freitag, 21. April 2017 12:10:07 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: >>  Hi, >> >>  Jedrzej asked me to raise the issue here. >> >>  Rationale for both allowing, as well as for why I think the rationale for >>  the existing ban is wrong, is

Re: [Development] Deleter that calls deleteLater() for use with std::unique_ptr<> and other smart pointers

r::operator()(T *pointer) const { if > (pointer) pointer->deleteLater(); } No strong reason, this was one of my thoughts too. One minor thing is that it won't have anything to do with QScopedPointer. > > Darin Broady > dbroa...@yahoo.com > > On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 9:44

Re: [Development] Deleter that calls deleteLater() for use with std::unique_ptr<> and other smart pointers

19.04.2017, 20:58, "Ville Voutilainen" <ville.voutilai...@gmail.com>: > On 19 April 2017 at 20:48, Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru> wrote: >>  19.04.2017, 20:43, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: >>>  On quarta-feira, 1

Re: [Development] Deleter that calls deleteLater() for use with std::unique_ptr<> and other smart pointers

19.04.2017, 20:43, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com>: > On quarta-feira, 19 de abril de 2017 06:44:24 PDT Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  Hello, >> >>  I think it will be a good idea to provide implementation of functor calling >>  delete

Re: [Development] Deleter that calls deleteLater() for use with std::unique_ptr<> and other smart pointers

19.04.2017, 17:52, "Giuseppe D'Angelo" <giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com>: > Il 19/04/2017 15:44, Konstantin Tokarev ha scritto: >>  I think it will be a good idea to provide implementation of functor calling >>  deleteLater() instead of delete which can be use

[Development] Deleter that calls deleteLater() for use with std::unique_ptr<> and other smart pointers

Hello, I think it will be a good idea to provide implementation of functor calling deleteLater() instead of delete which can be used with std::unique_ptr, std::shared_ptr and other smart pointers with compatible interface. We already have QScopedPointerObjectDeleteLater, however it implements

Re: [Development] Make qtstyleplugins an official module and release it

17.04.2017, 21:20, "Sérgio Martins" : > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Thiago Macieira > wrote: >>  Looks like we moved important functionality from qtbase to qtstyleplugins. >> Why >>  wasn't it added to .gitmodules and included in the 5.7.0

Re: [Development] As Qt contemplates its future..

15.04.2017, 01:23, "Shawn Rutledge" : >>  On 13 Apr 2017, at 14:02, Randall O'Reilly >> wrote: >> >>  With the recent language explosion, there are now languages to fit >> everyone’s biases and aesthetics. > > This explosion is possible

Re: [Development] Qt 5.10 schedule proposal

13.04.2017, 15:11, "Bogdan Vatra" : > It's just me or did you forgot to add 5.8.1? I think I hear how Mr. Turunen is pulling his hair out reading this :) > > Cheers, > BogDan. > > On joi, 13 aprilie 2017 11:48:06 EEST Jani Heikkinen wrote: >>  After short internal

Re: [Development] As Qt contemplates its future..

13.04.2017, 13:25, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru>: > 13.04.2017, 12:32, "Nikita Krupenko" <krne...@gmail.com>: >>  On четверг, 13 апреля 2017 г. 08:24:39 EEST Randall O'Reilly wrote: >>>   In the context of all this recent discussion

Re: [Development] As Qt contemplates its future..

13.04.2017, 12:32, "Nikita Krupenko" : > On четверг, 13 апреля 2017 г. 08:24:39 EEST Randall O'Reilly wrote: >>  In the context of all this recent discussion about modernizing Qt to >>  accommodate updates to C++, has anyone given any thought to the radical >>  idea of

Re: [Development] As Qt contemplates its future..

13.04.2017, 08:25, "Randall O'Reilly" : > In the context of all this recent discussion about modernizing Qt to > accommodate updates to C++, has anyone given any thought to the radical idea > of creating a brand new product using Go? Go (golang) is rapidly gaining

Re: [Development] Focusing bug fixes to 5.9 branch and patch releases during H1/17

11.04.2017, 15:45, "Ville Voutilainen" : > On 11 April 2017 at 15:16, Marc Mutz wrote: >>  On Tuesday 11 April 2017 13:49:01 Ville Voutilainen wrote: >>>  You say we discourage cherry-picking. Why? Is that not a fairly >>>  natural way to

Re: [Development] Focusing bug fixes to 5.9 branch and patch releases during H1/17

11.04.2017, 14:37, "Tuukka Turunen" : > Hi, > > We have discussed this already multiple times and it is well known by > everyone. Closing of the branch has been clearly decided, only item open has > been the time. Now that we have 5.9 beta released, I think it clearly is

Re: [Development] Focusing bug fixes to 5.9 branch and patch releases during H1/17

11.04.2017, 11:56, "Ville Voutilainen" : > On 11 April 2017 at 11:47, Tuukka Turunen wrote: >>  Hi Marc, >> >>  I can understand your viewpoint, but unfortunately keeping 5.8 open does >> cause additional load to the systems as well as people.

Re: [Development] What happened to the *-dbg packages in Ubuntu 17.04

07.04.2017, 21:18, "Nathan Osman" : > Hi, > > I recently switched to the second beta of Kubuntu 17.04. I attempted to > install the qtbase5-dbg package, only to discover that it was absent. In > fact, not only was this package missing but all of the *-dbg packages for

Re: [Development] Passing QSize, QPoint, QTime and other small structs by value

07.04.2017, 13:41, "Sergio Martins" : > Hi, > > Some time ago I documented the guidelines on passing by value vs > const-ref: > https://wiki.qt.io/API_Design_Principles#Passing_by_const-ref_vs._Passing_by_value > This was discussed in #qt-labs at the time and informally

Re: [Development] Moving Qt's undo framework out of Qt Widgets

05.04.2017, 17:46, "Oswald Buddenhagen" : > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 12:02:32PM +, Morten Sørvig wrote: >>  On 5 Apr 2017, at 12:37, Oswald Buddenhagen >> wrote: >>  > also, a plan for splitting up qtbase wouldn't be entirely off the >>  >

Re: [Development] Moving Qt's undo framework out of Qt Widgets

05.04.2017, 12:24, "Mitch Curtis" : > I'd like to remove the undo framework's dependency on widgets. There's a bug > report for this here: > > https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-40040 > > My plan is mentioned in the commit message of the following change: > >

Re: [Development] QList

30.03.2017, 17:33, "Matthew Woehlke" <mwoehlke.fl...@gmail.com>: > On 2017-03-29 18:33, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >>  30.03.2017, 00:17, "Philippe" <philw...@gmail.com>: >>>  And being able to use a QVector with O(1) by-value assigment

Re: [Development] QList

31.03.2017, 10:38, "Marc Mutz" : > On Friday 31 March 2017 08:57:50 Simon Hausmann wrote: >>  Hi, >> >>  To me this appears to be comparing the questions that new learning >>  programmers have with questions of seasoned C++ programmers. I understand >>  that we should cater

Re: [Development] QList

30.03.2017, 00:17, "Philippe" : >>  I would really, really like to know why QVector is easier to use? > > Following common methods are immediate. With std::vector, you need to > add boilerplate code to achieve the same. > > QVector::insert > QVector::remove >

Re: [Development] QList

20.03.2017, 19:40, "Scott Aron Bloom" : > Now, myself, and a few others are sitting on Qt 5.5 because of the issues > with the web browser change in 5.6... but that's another issue You should upgrade to QtWebKit TP5 [1], binary builds are available for Qt 5.8 for all

Re: [Development] QList

18.03.2017, 11:06, "Ville Voutilainen" : > There's been a fair amount of talk about QList's future, so I'm curious: > > 1) What are the problems with QList? https://marcmutz.wordpress.com/effective-qt/containers/#containers-qlist > 2) What do we plan to do about

Re: [Development] Comparison of version numbers in qmake project files

07.03.2017, 13:54, "Alexander Volkov" : > Hi, > > Need more reviewers for https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/181665/ > which adds test functions for comparing version numbers: > > versionNumberAtLeast(VERSION, 5.10.0) { >  ... > } > > versionNumberLessThan(VERSION,

Re: [Development] There is the wrong behavior with QUdpSocket && EAGAIN on *nix?

01.03.2017, 13:28, "Denis Shienkov" : > Hi all, > > I have use Qt 5.8, and I want to send to the UDP socket many datagrams > (e.g. 1 datagrams, each datagram have 1000 bytes size). Totally unrelated to your main issue, but make sure you are using connected UDP

Re: [Development] Focusing bug fixes to 5.9 branch and patch releases during H1/17

18.02.2017, 22:13, "Thiago Macieira" : > On sábado, 18 de fevereiro de 2017 06:36:07 PST Mat Sutcliffe wrote: >>  Keeping 5.9.0 on schedule even while 5.8.0 blows past its planned release >>  date would seem to be appropriate when you have the capability to >>  

Re: [Development] Decrease amounth of delivered src packages

15.02.2017, 20:07, "Thiago Macieira" : > On quarta-feira, 15 de fevereiro de 2017 09:04:12 PST Konstantin Podsvirov > wrote: >>  This can be not quite on this topic, but I have a suggestion and MVP >>  implementation for QtIFW. >> >>  This may affect the development

Re: [Development] Decrease amounth of delivered src packages

15.02.2017, 13:39, "Jani Heikkinen" : > Hi all, > > As you know we need to optimize our systems to be able to keep our plans in > the future. In CI side we are handling at least 4 different branches at same > time. Releasing side we should be able to do many

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >