[Interest] Qt Quick 2.x Complex ListView

2014-05-20 Thread m...@rpzdesign.com
Hello QTers: After pouring through available online documentation, I am at a loss for rendering complex Listviews from a C++ based AbstractModel. Does anybody have an idea on how to create each row of the listview with a delegate that allows for each row to be rendered with separate logic

Re: [Interest] moc not moccing

2014-05-20 Thread Konrad Rosenbaum
Hi, how did you try to build this? Did you use qmake, plain make, cmake, ...? However, I think you do need a constructor for classes that are processed by moc - at least it is good style to provide one. One like this would be sufficient: C++-98: NewTest(){} C++-11: NewTest()=default; Also, it

[Interest] STILL LOOKING for a QPA

2014-05-20 Thread Jason H
About once a month now I get an off-list request for Vaudeville. There is interest. But I have to say its not ready because I dont know how to make a QPA plugin. It was released with 4.8, API was supposed to be stable by 5.0. QPA is being used on the various platforms. We are up to 5.3 now.

Re: [Interest] STILL LOOKING for a QPA

2014-05-20 Thread Tomasz Olszak
2014-05-20 15:23 GMT+02:00 Tomasz Siekierda sierd...@gmail.com: On 20 May 2014 14:17, Knight Andrew andrew.kni...@digia.com wrote: Where are the docs? QPA is an internal API, so don't expect any formal documentation or compatibility promises. I don't think this is a good idea to hide the

Re: [Interest] STILL LOOKING for a QPA

2014-05-20 Thread Tomasz Siekierda
On 20 May 2014 15:37, Tomasz Olszak olszak.tom...@gmail.com wrote: It's not that it is hidden. It's private so that it can change in next non patch version. You can use it on your own responsibility and many developers, especially in embedded world, do that. Minimal documentation is a fact,

Re: [Interest] STILL LOOKING for a QPA

2014-05-20 Thread Jason Hihn
I can appreciate that the API is unstable, and jsut putting that in the documentation as /* THAR BE DRAGONS HERE */ (which Ive seen in actual code somewhere, not necessarily Qt) or something to that affect would be sufficient. I myself in the course of trying vaudeville found a lot of calls

[Interest] Apple iOS app store LGPL approvals?

2014-05-20 Thread Jason Hihn
Per http://qt-project.org/wiki/Licensing-talk-about-mobile-platforms , The specific statement in question is It remains to be seen whether Apple will accept applications that bundle dylibs into the iOS App Store Do we have a better idea of waht the situation on iOS is?

[Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread maitai
Hello, I have a problem reported by my MAC/OS testers with the brand new 530 official release. As it seems, there is a problem with QMessageBox::show() which seems to be blocking eventLoop. The sequence is like that: qWarning()step 1; waitBox = new

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread Thiago Macieira
Em ter 20 maio 2014, às 18:39:41, mai...@virtual-winds.org escreveu: If I run this under 530/MacOS, I see only up to step 4 in the console. If I remove processEvents() it continues, but I have problems later for instance doing deleteLater() which never calls the destructor. As it seems to

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread maitai
Thanks for your reply Why is removing the processEvent the right thing to do? Anyhow if I remove it, the event loop is locked anyway, and no more events are processed. So imo the processEvents just highlights the problem, it's not the cause of it. Also note that I have similar sequences in

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread John Weeks
Sounds like the same problem I ran into: https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-38874 -John Weeks On May 20, 2014, at 10:04 AM, mai...@virtual-winds.org wrote: Thanks for your reply Why is removing the processEvent the right thing to do? Anyhow if I remove it, the event loop is

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread maitai
Indeed it's the same problem. For us it's a blocker and mac/os users will have to stay under 521 until it's fixed. Philippe Lelong Le 20-05-2014 19:19, John Weeks a écrit : Sounds like the same problem I ran into: https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-38874 -John Weeks On May

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread Thiago Macieira
Em ter 20 maio 2014, às 19:04:39, mai...@virtual-winds.org escreveu: Thanks for your reply Why is removing the processEvent the right thing to do? Because processEvents() means nested event loops. You shouldn't do that. You should show() and then return;, so the non-nested event loops

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread John Weeks
In my case, we're creating a kind of progress window. The code that runs while the dialog is up is rather old and not thread-safe. But using Qt before 5.3 I can show the dialog, run the computation, adjust the information in the dialog and call processEvents to cause it to repaint and to allow

Re: [Interest] a few questions about QML Components

2014-05-20 Thread Andre Somers
Nurmi J-P schreef op 19-5-2014 14:29: On 19 May 2014, at 12:51, Alexander Ivash elder...@gmail.com wrote: I was trying to use QML components in simple android application but confronted several issues: 1. I couldn't find any API allowing to adjust widths of columns in TableView based on

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread Thiago Macieira
Em ter 20 maio 2014, às 23:11:06, mai...@virtual-winds.org escreveu: I'm doing processEvent() just to make sure the dialog is painted before an heavy treatment. Basically it shows Please wait while the process is running. I guess I am not the only one doing such things... If I don't call

Re: [Interest] pb with 530 official release and MAC/OS

2014-05-20 Thread John Weeks
On May 20, 2014, at 2:16 PM, Paul Miller p...@fxtech.com wrote: Your best bet is to do your work in a thread while .exec()ing the dialog. Then the main window UI's event loop can spin normally. In my case, the code that executes is not thread-safe. It's ancient, complicated code. If I try to