Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

On Friday, 19 January 2018 09:26:10 PST Edward Welbourne wrote: > Jaroslaw Kobus (19 January 2018 17:09) > > > "give" may be confused with "get", which is usually an accessor. I may > > also think "Am I giving (to QCoreApplication)" or "The > > QCoreApplication is giving (me)". Maybe it is just a

Re: [Development] how to include further changes while previous commit is still under review?

19.01.2018, 01:58, "Samuel Gaist" : >>  On 18 Jan 2018, at 22:42, Daniel Savi wrote: >> >>  Hello qt devs >> >>  I'm back with another newbie question. I have committed a patch that is >> still under review on gerrit. >> >>  Meanwhile, I've got a

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

Jaroslaw Kobus (19 January 2018 17:09) > "give" may be confused with "get", which is usually an accessor. I may > also think "Am I giving (to QCoreApplication)" or "The > QCoreApplication is giving (me)". Maybe it is just a matter of the > other verb? Absorb, hand over, hand on, suck in,

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

19.01.2018, 20:07, "Adam Treat" : > How about "transfer" Why not just use move semantics of language instead of inventing new terms? > > On 01/19/2018 11:57 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>  On sexta-feira, 19 de janeiro de 2018 08:26:21 PST Philippe wrote: >>>  +20 years ago,

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

How about "transfer" On 01/19/2018 11:57 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: On sexta-feira, 19 de janeiro de 2018 08:26:21 PST Philippe wrote: +20 years ago, the (good) Taligent crossplatform project, in its guideline, proposed: adopt() aka "take ownership" orphan() aka "release ownership" Given

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

On sexta-feira, 19 de janeiro de 2018 08:26:21 PST Philippe wrote: > +20 years ago, the (good) Taligent crossplatform project, in its guideline, > proposed: > > adopt() aka "take ownership" > > orphan() aka "release ownership" Given that we already have "take" methods that release ownership in

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

+20 years ago, the (good) Taligent crossplatform project, in its guideline, proposed: adopt() aka "take ownership" orphan() aka "release ownership" Philippe On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 16:09:21 + Jaroslaw Kobus wrote: > "give" may be confused with "get", which is usually

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

"give" may be confused with "get", which is usually an accessor. I may also think "Am I giving (to QCoreApplication)" or "The QCoreApplication is giving (me)". Maybe it is just a matter of the other verb? Absorb, hand over, hand on, suck in, swallow... Jarek

Re: [Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

19.01.2018, 18:16, "Jesus Fernandez" : > Hi all! > > I always found something annoying in the Qt API. The problem comes with the > setters of our properties. When I want to pass an object to a property I > never know if I need to take care of the object or relay on

[Development] Setters: Clarifying the ownership

Hi all! I always found something annoying in the Qt API. The problem comes with the setters of our properties. When I want to pass an object to a property I never know if I need to take care of the object or relay on parenting system to avoid memory leaks. To know if the object is going to be

Re: [Development] How to use ANDROID_EXTRA_PLUGINS property in qmake projects

I have found a solution and have updated the bug, where I added a source project with correct solution: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-65864 Maybe it will helps to anybody else. PS: Needs to extend a doc about using of the ANDROID_EXTRA_PLUGINS anyway... PS2: Also, the qmake copies

[Development] How to use ANDROID_EXTRA_PLUGINS property in qmake projects

Hi all. I have created a custom qt-positioning plugin, which just every second provides a new fake position/coordinate. This plugin work perfectly e.g. on Windows, but it does not work on Android, as it does not loaded, because it wrongly deployed to APK file. I have read about the