Re: [Development] Question about Qt's future

Roland sayeth: snip, I liked the design to split business logic into C++ and UI design into QML and I still like it, but I came across several blocking issues (some of them are only valid for our application, some of them are general): - Our application has a huge framework of value

Re: [Development] Question about Qt's future

I'm not Roland (talking about value-types), but I completely agree with his comments on why they are important (we have that issue also). But, jumping-in, ... snip, from Roland, - Our application has a huge framework of value classes. They cannot (or at least it does not make sense to)

Re: [Development] QtQml value types

snip, use QVariant Maps to transfer property data between C++ and QML While your proposed approach is rather clean, it carries one drawback, which is the lack of type information, with all its consequences. snip, need to convert domain-types to/from strings/doubles/QVariant on QML side

Re: [Development] Question about Qt's future

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:39 AM, Hartmann Thomas thomas.hartm...@digia.comwrote: Hi, gluing together C++ and Java Script is currently not always that easy. The solution I propose is the option to write C++ code in the exact same way you currently write Java Script code. This means every QML

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

(I'm just jumping in here...) snip, Replicant for IPC Bret spaketh: In trying to address your points, I fear it sounds like I think D-Bus is bad. That's not what I'm trying to say. I'm saying D-Bus/QtDBus didn't work *for my use-case*. So I created something that worked better *for my

Re: [Development] Request for a sandbox area: Replicant

This cross process stuff is starting to feel like 1996 and remote procedure RPC calls, now using QT signals and slots. drool again for effect. One could review the history of microsoft and the fine RPC mechanisms that turned out to be mostly unusable, or maybe just unused. Keep the

[Development] CppCon Just Ended (next year will be 20-25 Sep 2015)

Just got back from CppCon (http://cppcon.org/), WOW what a great conference for C++. Apologies for cross-post qt-interest and qt-dev, but wanted to be sure both groups saw the announcement for next year (20-25 Sep-2015). WOW AGAIN for a great conference. Really heavy-hitters there, with

Re: [Development] QtRemoteObjects (was Replicant)

Sayeth Simon: On the other hand I think it is critical for Qt's success to also support use- cases that leave our little universe (of Qt). And that means either building something yourself and convincing others to adopt it or adopt a technology/approach that already has existing mind

Re: [Development] Qt LTS C++11 plans (CopperSpice)

For example, with moc removed we support template classes that inherit from QObject. Wow. I would (almost) kill for having that feature in Qt! You can work around it quite easily. What doesn’t work is adding new signals / slots inside a template class. So just add a base class declaring

Re: [Development] Qt LTS C++11 plans (CopperSpice)

snip, shared pointers Bo Thorsen sayeth: This answer is going to be one big IMHO. Anything that stops people from throwing shared pointers all over the code is A Good Thing. As someone once said: Shared pointers are a solution in search of a problem. Scoped pointers are fine, but

[Development] MSVC2015 and Qt5.5 -- dot release plans?

Microsoft announced MSVS2015 will be released on July 20: http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-sets-release-date-for-visual-studio-2015/ Those of us that have been following the MS compiler know that the MSVC2015 is a particularly strong compiler, making up for lots of lost-ground in

Re: [Development] Qt 5.5.1 'rc' available

> > On Wednesday 23 September 2015 08:37:54 Heikkinen Jani wrote: > > We are targeting to release Qt 5.5.1 as soon as possible, most probably > > during next week. > On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Gerhard Scheikl wrote: > Hi > > Could you please give us a new estimate? >

Re: [Development] API Change in QtRemoteObjects

Hi, Brett-- IMHO, this is a very good change. The library will be easier to use, and more accessible from QML. Also, now is probably the time to make such an API change. I'm watching this effort with great interest -- thanks for all your hard work. --charley On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 10:51 AM,

Re: [Development] QtSingleApplication in Qt proper?

+1, I've found many good uses for QtSingleApplication, and think this is a good (highly practical) feature for "Qt-proper". --charley On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Kevin Funk wrote: > On Donnerstag, 16. Juni 2016 00:19:10 CEST Kevin Funk wrote: > > (snip) > > > > Question:

Re: [Development] Question about QCoreApplicationData::*_libpaths

Apologies for "hijacking" the thread, but two points were raised that IMHO would be helpful if they were answered directly: (1) Future of Qt binary compatibility (2) Use of std:: containers (especially in context of (1)). We can take this to another thread as-needed. However, quick "recap":

Re: [Development] Dropping VS 2012 in Qt 5.7

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Just starting a new thread to get the attention of those that may have > missed > it in the other platform. > > The proposal is to drop VS 2012 support in Qt 5.7 already, instead of > supporting it in 5.7 only

Re: [Development] What kind of airplane we want to build?

Thiago sayeth: > , > But I have no plans on extending QAtomicInteger and QAtomicPointer further. > There are a couple of missing features that will probably never be > implemented: > > * std::memory_order_consume and std::memory_order_cst > * GCC's extension for hidden lock elision > *

Re: [Development] What kind of airplane we want to build?

Thiago sayeth: > So no, I don't think we risk becoming irrelevant against other airplane > makers > anytime soon. Our competitor are those transatlantic heavyweight ships > (HTML5). > , LOL!!! That's actually a very good point (in addition to

[Development] CppNow Call For Submissions 2016

The Call For Submissions for the CppNow conference (May 9-14, 2016) in Aspen, CO will close this Friday (Fri-29-Jan). This is an intimate C++ conference with great minds, including many Qt users, and past speakers have come from the Qt community. Consider attending, and/or submitting a talk.

Re: [Development] Qt Virtual Keyboard (New KDE Free Qt Foundation Agreement and Changes)

+1 On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:32 AM, Knoll Lars wrote: > +1 and +1 from me as well :) > > Cheers, > Lars > > > > > On 19/01/16 13:16, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" < > development-boun...@qt-project.org on behalf of marc.m...@kdab.com> wrote: > > >On Tuesday

Re: [Development] [Releasing] HEADS UP: Updates to Qt 5.7 (and Qt 5.8) tool versions

> > Visual Studio 2015 Update 1 to Windows 10 > > Please let’s keep in mind that Visual Studio 2015 Update 2 is coming out, > I don’t think that it will be ready for Qt 5.7, but we should be prepared > for Qt 5.8 indeed. > > Regards, > Diego > +1 --charley

Re: [Development] Use of Standard Library containers in Qt source code

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 3:47 AM, Marco Bubke wrote: > , Lets face it, the world is much bigger than Qt, and I think there > is much to gain if we integrate better with alien libraries. > My understanding is that most alien libraries are not binary-based (i.e., they are ternary

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

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 3:59 AM, Tuukka Turunen wrote: > Short summary: The Qt Company has decided to focus development effort to 5.9 > and dev branches in order to reach the planned timeline for Qt 5.9 release > and make improvements in the CI system. , > In the CI system

Re: [Development] How to include Standard Library headers from Qt ones?

Marc: > I know Howard's ideas about hashing, and I agree with them. In Qt, we > largely > ignore the issue of hash collisions for a given type and just hash its > members, combining with boost::hash_combine, and hope for the best. As > such, >