bEngine repository ready for that within the next week.
- Zeno
From: Hausmann Simon
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 9:44 PM
To: Sergio Ahumada; development@qt-project.org
Cc: Albisser Zeno
Subject: SV: [Development] QML engine changes
Zeno, do we still need t
Zeno, do we still need that or is init-repository.py required anyway?
Simon
Fra: Sergio Ahumada
Sendt: 21:35 tirsdag 6. august 2013
Til: development@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] QML engine changes
On 08/06/2013 09:25 PM, Hausmann Simon wrote:
> Darn, I see. Maybe the solution is
Darn, I see. Maybe the solution is not remove the --recursive Parameter from
the submodule update call.
Simon
Fra: Sergio Ahumada
Sendt: 20:40 tirsdag 6. august 2013
Til: development@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] QML engine changes
On 08/06/2013 08:35 PM, Hausmann Simon wrote:
>
Yes, that's intentional. However it is not required for use or development. It
is useful when doing changes on the ecmascript bits.
Simon
Fra: Sergio Ahumada
Sendt: 20:24 tirsdag 6. august 2013
Til: development@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] QML engine changes
On 08/06/2013 05:
Alan Alpert:
That is correct. I would argue that this design choice is also
correct, because text is the best common format for human editing.
Everyone will already have a fully feature text editor that they are
comfortable with, and then they can use all of the features
immediately. In contrast,
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:14:27AM +0200, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Monday 24. June 2013 23.58.17 André Pönitz wrote:
> > [Upfront: I am _really_ happy to see V8 and the glue code its service
> > required to be on its way out. But...]
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 01:30:18PM +0200, Simon Hausma
[Upfront: I am _really_ happy to see V8 and the glue code its service
required to be on its way out. But...]
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 01:30:18PM +0200, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> > This confuses me a bit. Why isn't the implementation tuned specifically
> > for QML, instead of being a fully-compliant
Simon sayeth:
>
Chris replied:
> > This is really exciting news! Good stuff!
>
+1
> > I wonder how much performance delta there is between JIT and pure
> > interpretted, with a tight enough interpreter loop, if you make some
> > simplifying assumptions (eg, types can't change at runtime / e
Hi,
This is really exciting news! Good stuff!
> Hi,
> >
> > Does that include to get rid of v8 as an JS engine option for QML2?
>
> Yes, that's exactly the proposed change.
>
> > I have not tested it yet, but it would be interesting to know if the new
> > engine also uses just in time compilatio
Hi,
Does that include to get rid of v8 as an JS engine option for QML2?
I have not tested it yet, but it would be interesting to know if the new
engine also uses just in time compilation, as we had quite some work done
to get v8 running on WinCE due to wrong ARM abis for Windows CE among other
thi
10 matches
Mail list logo
