On 20 February 2013 08:47, Samuel Rødal samuel.ro...@digia.com wrote:
and it makes the diff between patch sets displayed by the Gerrit
interface (by choosing Old Version History to be other than Base)
totally unreadable.
The correct process when doing rebases is:
.. is it me or there's
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 08.47.40, Samuel Rødal wrote:
The correct process when doing rebases is:
git pull --rebase # or your favorite git work-flow
git push gerrit HEAD:refs/for/some_branch
# add comment in change on gerrit about being a pure rebase
# do some changes
git
On 02/20/2013 09:22 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 08.47.40, Samuel Rødal wrote:
The correct process when doing rebases is:
git pull --rebase # or your favorite git work-flow
git push gerrit HEAD:refs/for/some_branch
# add comment in change on gerrit
On 02/20/2013 01:01 PM, Shawn Rutledge wrote:
On 20 February 2013 09:43, Samuel Rødal samuel.ro...@digia.com wrote:
On 02/20/2013 09:22 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 08.47.40, Samuel Rødal wrote:
The correct process when doing rebases is:
git pull
Hi all,
Some time ago there was some talk about improving Qt's multithreading
API. I'm summarizing them here to stop them from fading into
obscurity, and to see if there's any interest in following them up.
Here are the tasks mentioned:
- Replace/Rewrite QtConcurrent [2]
- Create/Find a good API
Op 20-2-2013 15:45, Sze Howe Koh schreef:
Hi all,
Some time ago there was some talk about improving Qt's multithreading
API. I'm summarizing them here to stop them from fading into
obscurity, and to see if there's any interest in following them up.
There is also a proposal posted here:
On 20 February 2013 22:49, André Somers an...@familiesomers.nl wrote:
Op 20-2-2013 15:45, Sze Howe Koh schreef:
Hi all,
Some time ago there was some talk about improving Qt's multithreading
API. I'm summarizing them here to stop them from fading into
obscurity, and to see if there's any
On Wednesday 20 February 2013 22:45:21 Sze Howe Koh wrote:
Hi all,
Some time ago there was some talk about improving Qt's multithreading
API. I'm summarizing them here to stop them from fading into
obscurity, and to see if there's any interest in following them up.
Here are the tasks
On 20 Feb 2013, at 4:57 PM, Olivier Goffart wrote:
On Wednesday 20 February 2013 22:45:21 Sze Howe Koh wrote:
Hi all,
Some time ago there was some talk about improving Qt's multithreading
API. I'm summarizing them here to stop them from fading into
obscurity, and to see if there's any
Hello,
A few thoughts:
- In general and especially for newcomers, encourage task-orientated
concurrency and avoiding shared state where possible.
This partly about documentation and the examples but also in the kind of
approach that the APIs optimize for.
- Having had the er, pleasure of
One other thing - QtConcurrent::run(), QRunnable and invokeMethod() do not
provide any standard mid-task cancellation mechanism, which I've found to
be a very common need in the context of a client app which is offloading a
chunk of heavy work to background threads to avoid UI lag - eg. file
On 20 February 2013 23:57, Olivier Goffart oliv...@woboq.com wrote:
Someone has already been working of some feature such as:
...
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/t/65/
Ah, these are quite similar to my second post
(http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2013-February/009970.html).
On 21 February 2013 00:02, Rutledge Shawn shawn.rutle...@digia.com wrote:
On 20 Feb 2013, at 4:57 PM, Olivier Goffart wrote:
On Wednesday 20 February 2013 22:45:21 Sze Howe Koh wrote:
Hi all,
Some time ago there was some talk about improving Qt's multithreading
API. I'm summarizing them
Hi. I'm the one Olivier mentioned :p
I didn't have time to pursue further the work I started, but I intend
to, someday.
The plan, as suggested by thiago was to have a QThread::run(functor)
method acting exactly like QtConcurrent::run, but using a new QThead.
A similar QThreadPool::run function
What about using of OpenMP standard? It could be very usefull and well known
by the C/C++ comunity.
--
Linux Registered User: #515619
Linux Registered Machine: #421715
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
On 21 February 2013 00:29, Robert Knight robertkni...@gmail.com wrote:
One other thing - QtConcurrent::run(), QRunnable and invokeMethod() do not
provide any standard mid-task cancellation mechanism, which I've found to be
a very common need in the context of a client app which is offloading a
On 19.2.2013 22.02, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On terça-feira, 19 de fevereiro de 2013 19.29.50, Turunen Tuukka wrote:
Hi Thiago,
Due to the way earlier releases are done it is not possible to have
perfectly clean history. This has been discussed in December and
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 23.26.51, John Layt wrote:
Hi,
As per Lars' email to development, I would like to submit my implementation
of QTimeZone and its integration in QDateTime for inclusion in Qt 5.1. My
development branch is currently on gitorious [1] but I'd like to push
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 21.03.10, Turunen Tuukka wrote:
I understand how the previous releases were done, but I disagree on the
plan.
I want the changes in the 4.7 branch released and I don't want the
changes in
the 4.7-digia branch released unless the rest of the Qt Project
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 16.34.19, Thiago Macieira wrote:
You cannot make that call alone. What's more, we discussed the problem and
the solution for two months in the security mailing list, which you're a
part of. If there's a problem, please start a new thread on this mailing
Starting a thread to discuss the fix and whether its fix is appropriate.
The fix can be divided in two parts:
1) the use of shmget in QSharedMemory to implement the public API of sharing
memory
2) internal uses of shmget, subdividing into:
a) internal uses inside Qt only, never with
On quinta-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2013 10.34.22, Amogh Kudari wrote:
Hi All,
Any idea on how to proceed to remove this assertion mentioned below.
Please provide any inputs/suggestions.
ASSERT : QCoreApplicationPrivate::eventDispatcher != 0 in file
kernel\qcoreapplication.cpp ,
On 21.2.2013 2.43, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On quarta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2013 16.34.19, Thiago Macieira wrote:
You cannot make that call alone. What's more, we discussed the problem
and
the solution for two months in the security mailing list, which you're
a
23 matches
Mail list logo
