On Jul 15, 2014, at 7:36 PM, Olivier Goffart oliv...@woboq.com wrote:
On Tuesday 15 July 2014 10:38:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Olivier Goffart wrote:
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
1. Are we allowed to add new conversions?
The question is tricky because adding a new conversion is a
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:51:15AM +0200, Richard Höhne wrote:
The problem is, that the other files are shown under the subfolder
lib.pri and not under the header- and cpp-files.
Is there a possibility to change it[?]
no.
wildcard matching in project files is considered bad practice and no
+1
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 08:08:39PM +, Gladhorn Frederik wrote:
Hi all,
it’s my pleasure to nominate Milian Wolff as approver. He’s a great guy,
works for KDAB and has done interesting work on profiling, improves KDevelop
amongst other things and has been active with all things web
On Tuesday 15 of July 2014 11:59:03 Olivier Goffart wrote:
1.3 Should we try to support a user's type conversions out of the
box?
Currently a user needs to manually register a conversion function
so Qt can know it and use it. For certain types we can do much better,
On Tuesday 15 of July 2014 10:38:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Olivier Goffart wrote:
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
1. Are we allowed to add new conversions?
The question is tricky because adding a new conversion is a
behavior
change, as this code:
if
Olivier Goffart wrote:
I'd say yes, for sensible conversion
You are right that it is a behaviour change, but i think it is worth
changing it.
Why?
On one hand you promise binary compatibility. On the other hand
behaviour changes are proposed to be done on an nice to have
base?
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
I wholeheartedly disagree. Most of my QVariant uses are there because
the Qt API requires me to use it, and I sometimes use it voluntarily for
type-agnostic storage or transport of things. But in those cases I never
want to extract
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
[...]
When one use QVariant, it is because we want to enjoy dynamic typing and
nice conversions.
I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want automatic
conversions when using QVariant. A search for
+1
On 7/15/14, 10:08 PM, Gladhorn Frederik frederik.gladh...@digia.com
wrote:
Hi all,
it¹s my pleasure to nominate Milian Wolff as approver. He¹s a great guy,
works for KDAB and has done interesting work on profiling, improves
KDevelop amongst other things and has been active with all things
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Olivier Goffart wrote:
I'd say yes, for sensible conversion
You are right that it is a behaviour change, but i think it is worth
changing it.
Why?
On one hand you promise binary compatibility. On the other hand
Olivier Goffart:
Poenitz Andre wrote:
I wholeheartedly disagree. Most of my QVariant uses are there because
the Qt API requires me to use it, and I sometimes use it voluntarily for
type-agnostic storage or transport of things. But in those cases I never
want to extract anything else from
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Olivier Goffart wrote:
It's always a dilemma. We have to look at how likely we are to break
applications and I don't think adding a conversion is likely to cause
breakages.
Type safety is a safety net that catches errors very early
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
Eike wrote:
[...]
We use common sense on a case by case basic.
Either there is no “common sense” common to me, or this rule has failed in
the past already ;)
bool - string ?
bytearray - int/long/double ?
keysequence - int ?
string - bool ?
string -
On Jul 16, 2014, at 11:28 AM, Jędrzej Nowacki jedrzej.nowa...@digia.com wrote:
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
[...]
When one use QVariant, it is because we want to enjoy dynamic typing and
nice conversions.
I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator
On Jul 16, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Konrad Rosenbaum kon...@silmor.de wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Olivier Goffart wrote:
It's always a dilemma. We have to look at how likely we are to break
applications and I don't think adding a conversion is likely to cause
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:06:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
Eike wrote:
[...]
We use common sense on a case by case basic.
Either there is no “common sense” common to me, or this rule has failed
in
the past already ;)
bool - string ?
bytearray -
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 12:51:36 Olivier Goffart wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:06:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
Eike wrote:
[...]
We use common sense on a case by case basic.
Either there is no “common sense” common to me, or this rule has
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want automatic
conversions when using QVariant. A search for QVariant(Map) returns 5400
hits. In the map case, we usually expect the one retrieving the value for a
key to know
Olivier Goffart wrote:
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
[...]
What is wrong with string - int or bytearray - int?
At the very least, _implicit_ conversions should not lose data,
i.e. a A a1; B b = a1; A a2 = b; round trip ideally should yield
a1 == a2.
If I am ready to give up
Anyway. To summarize my position in the original context: QVariant
is as it is. It is convenient at times, and it is already too convenient
at times. Easy type conversion is a different use case than Type
agnostic storage. QVariant does a bit of both, only the second one
has ever been useful
Hi,
As I have not received any objection to the plan we will now conclude and
proceed with the proposed changes.
Qt WebEngine will become an official Qt add-on module. :-)
Cheers,
- Zeno
From: Zeno Albisser zeno.albis...@digia.commailto:zeno.albis...@digia.com
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:55:37
Definitely a +1 from me as well :)
From: development-bounces+michael.bruning=digia@qt-project.org
[development-bounces+michael.bruning=digia@qt-project.org] on behalf of
Albisser Zeno [zeno.albis...@digia.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:49
Hi
In the qml designer we are using comparisons of variants quite extensive and
run in smaller problems like wrong conversions. E.g. color is broken because
the alpha value is not used in the comparison. We would like to extent existing
comparisons too because we get the variants from
On 7 July 2014 15:10, Koehne Kai kai.koe...@digia.com wrote:
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[...]
1) Developers who face regressions (not just testers) are now in an awkward
position, and need to install an extra copy of Qt Creator (see
below)
Right, that's
On 7 July 2014 16:09, Ziller Eike eike.zil...@digia.com wrote:
On Jul 6, 2014, at 3:52 AM, Sze Howe Koh szehowe@gmail.com wrote:
2) In Qt Creator, the Qt version and kit are still listed as Qt
5.3.0, even though it has been upgraded to Qt 5.3.1. Since it is an
auto-detected entry, the
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for all your contributions over the years. Up to anything
interesting next?
On 16 July 2014 14:25, Stephen Kelly stephen.ke...@kdab.com wrote:
Hi,
After 5 years, my time at KDAB is coming to an end, and I'm going to have less
time for Qt development. I'll still be
On 7 July 2014 19:11, Frederik Gladhorn frederik.gladh...@digia.com wrote:
Mandag 7. juli 2014 10.02.55 skrev Ziller Eike:
On Jul 7, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Frederik Gladhorn frederik.gladh...@digia.com
wrote:
Mandag 7. juli 2014 07.10.00 skrev Koehne Kai:
No. When running an installer (online
On Jul 16, 2014, at 1:30 PM, Jędrzej Nowacki jedrzej.nowa...@digia.com wrote:
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want automatic
conversions when using QVariant. A search for QVariant(Map) returns 5400
hits. In
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 15:01:53 Ziller Eike wrote:
No idea what happens in animations, but I’d suppose that any conversions
there would be accidentally.
QPropertyAnimation is based on modifying QVariants, isn't it?
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect -
On Jul 16, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Sze Howe Koh szehowe@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 July 2014 19:11, Frederik Gladhorn frederik.gladh...@digia.com wrote:
Mandag 7. juli 2014 10.02.55 skrev Ziller Eike:
On Jul 7, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Frederik Gladhorn frederik.gladh...@digia.com
wrote:
Mandag 7. juli
On Jul 16, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 15:01:53 Ziller Eike wrote:
No idea what happens in animations, but I’d suppose that any conversions
there would be accidentally.
QPropertyAnimation is based on modifying QVariants,
On 7 July 2014 15:10, Koehne Kai kai.koe...@digia.com wrote:
2) In Qt Creator, the Qt version and kit are still listed as Qt 5.3.0, even
though it has been upgraded to Qt 5.3.1. Since it is an auto-detected entry,
the user cannot change the name.
Yeah, that's something we should fix in the
32 matches
Mail list logo
