This is amazing! And it is exactly what I am doing now using a custom
module and a custom test runner!
Thanks
On Thu, 31 May 2018 at 11:23, Christian Kandeler
wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2018 15:19:49 +0200
> Federico Frenguelli wrote:
>
> > I'm writing a test for a qt quick compo
var installed = input.moduleProperty("qbs", "install");
var additionalImportPaths = input.product.arguments; // This
one returns undefined!
}
That would be a more flexible alternative to the one based on a custom
module, but I can't find a
On Thu, 17 May 2018 at 10:25, Christian Kandeler <christian.kande...@qt.io>
wrote:
> On Wed, 16 May 2018 18:01:40 +0200
> Federico Frenguelli <synas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > If functions were properly supported as properties, there'd be a
nt.
>
That could be a clear and flexible solution but is it possible to use
function properties? Or you were thinking of wrapping the function
definition in a string??
--
Federico Frenguelli
___
Qbs mailing list
Qbs@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs
by QBS out
of the box using one of the existing module (Qt.qmltest for example).
On Tue, 15 May 2018 at 16:25, Christian Kandeler <christian.kande...@qt.io>
wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2018 15:52:44 +0200
> Federico Frenguelli <synas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not a Q
cpp tests with qt quick tests. Do you know
of any workaround to make this work?
I'm using QBS 1.11.1 and I'm running the tests from the command line.
Thanks
--
Federico Frenguelli
___
Qbs mailing list
Qbs@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qbs
