On sexta-feira, 23 de setembro de 2016 05:59:28 PDT Roland Hughes wrote:
> Currently working at a site which is using 5.4 commercial under Ubuntu
> 14.04 to develop an embedded system. Spent days tracking down a bug in
> the current project code base. There was an ugly for() loop which was
>
Lorenz,
Good call. I went back through the code. Was actually a QList<> not a
QHash, but . . . your mention of shared was the light which shined on
the monster. The pointer held in the QList was a pointer to an object
declared with CANBUSSHARED_EXPORT.
Thank you very much!
I hate mystery
> It was a C++ for (int x=0;...) loop, but we are compiling for C++ 11
Hm, then my guess would be that they were working on a QHash/container
that was shared and the first remove() performed a detach. Thus the
loop worked on a copy.
Best
Lorenz
___
It was a C++ for (int x=0;...) loop, but we are compiling for C++ 11
On 09/23/2016 07:44 AM, Lorenz Haas wrote:
Hi,
Has anybody
else seen this behavior in 5.x? Is removeAt() really queueing a low priority
event so the removeAt() doesn't actually happen until the event queue is
processed
Hi,
> Has anybody
> else seen this behavior in 5.x? Is removeAt() really queueing a low priority
> event so the removeAt() doesn't actually happen until the event queue is
> processed completely?
my QHash only has a remove() function. Also, it removes the item right
away, no events involved:
Currently working at a site which is using 5.4 commercial under Ubuntu
14.04 to develop an embedded system. Spent days tracking down a bug in
the current project code base. There was an ugly for() loop which was
processing a QHash (which really should have been a queue). They were
calling
