On Sep 25, 2011, at 6:27 PM, ext Holger Freyther wrote:
Hi,
I tried to run the autotests for the directFB backend and for one I
am not sure how to proceed. In tst_qpixmap::mask() the test constructs
a QBitmap() and then sets this mask on the QPixmap and check that
pixmap.mask().isNull().
On Sep 26, 2011, at 6:19 AM, ext Zack Rusin wrote:
On Friday, September 23, 2011 04:25:26 PM lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
Hi Niels,
while I very much would like to see some code to do advanced color space
management in Qt, I am unsure whether this should go into QtGui or into an
add-on
Alan wrote:
Does this mean that $module_name/examples would be split up? The bigger
'examples' becoming Qt Examples and moving to qtexamples and the smaller
ones becoming snippets (but staying in $module_name/examples)? Who
would be making this decision?
There seems to be consensus at least
On Sunday 25 September 2011 01:48:33 Иван Комиссаров wrote:
As long as QFileEngines are marked as deprecated, Qt will have no
possibility to implement virtual filesystem.
So i would like to discuss features of new VFS.
I have 2 questions. First - should it work using QFile and QDir classes
Hi,
Judging from this comment by Herb Sutter:
http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/BUILD/BUILD2011/TOOL-532T#c634517976543836549
It seems that WinRT can be consumed by means of the WRL template library,
which would make it possible to develop Metro applications using Qt. The
important thing to
26.09.2011, 14:58, henry.haveri...@nokia.com:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is
henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is only a
26.09.2011, 14:58, henry.haveri...@nokia.com:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 13:08:28 Stephen Kelly wrote:
Qt Test Needed for conformance testing but not required to be
included in the release. No compatibility promise
What is this about? There is no binary or source compatibility promise for
the QtTest module? Or do I
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 15:01:14 Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Why are you planning to support 32-bit Intel Compiler but not 64 bit? It
would be more reasonable to do vice versa.
Intel Compiler support is provided by Intel.
We started with 32-bit because that's the most important one
Hi Иван,
The consensus on the list seemed to be that we want
- to have a clean and minimalistic public API
- to not support editing / user MIME type use cases
This is your consensus, not mine.
My understanding is that user-defined MIME types are for supporting editing
MIME types.
On 9/26/11 1:12 PM, ext Konstantin Tokarev annu...@yandex.ru wrote:
26.09.2011, 14:58, henry.haveri...@nokia.com:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on
I don't see any of the embedded platforms for Qt 5.0. There is mention of
Linux, ARM7. Is this ARM7TDMI (which is almost ancient) or ARM-v7a
(Cortex-A8/A9/...)? What's the specific EVM that's planned?
BeagleBoard and Panda were some of the reference platforms used in Qt4. Are
they no longer
I'm tired arguing. If you don't need this code - ok. I stopped working on
qmime; i've done everything i want.
But i will not surprised if QtCreator will never use mime.
If you call consensus that you decided at nokia's office - ok.
26.09.2011, в 16:13, Thiago Macieira написал(а):
On Monday,
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 16:22:41 Иван Комиссаров wrote:
I'm tired arguing. If you don't need this code - ok. I stopped working on
qmime; i've done everything i want.
You need to stop arguing when the community reaches a consensus. After that
point, you need to accept and move on. If
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 12:10:55 lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
What is new low level C++ API for QtWebKit? Will we be able to use
WebKit 2
in pure C++ applications?
Nobody knows yet how it'll exactly look like. What we know is that we will
need the WebKit2 process separation for at
One problem that you forgot to ask QtCreator developers.
But at least, it is not my problems anymore.
26.09.2011, в 16:36, Thiago Macieira написал(а):
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 16:22:41 Иван Комиссаров wrote:
I'm tired arguing. If you don't need this code - ok. I stopped working on
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 16:45:39 Иван Комиссаров wrote:
One problem that you forgot to ask QtCreator developers.
But at least, it is not my problems anymore.
No, we didn't.
David Faure: IMHO the editing of MIME types in Qt Creator should be removed.
I asked danimo and he was very
Well, he decided for all QtCreator team.
26.09.2011, в 17:04, Thiago Macieira написал(а):
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 16:45:39 Иван Комиссаров wrote:
One problem that you forgot to ask QtCreator developers.
But at least, it is not my problems anymore.
No, we didn't.
David Faure:
If the file is on a remote file system, then those functions can also
potentially have a high latency.
For example, if you just lost connectivity, then the synchronous function would
not complete until it fails with a supervisory timeout at the network layer
(e.g. TCP reset in the case of
Hi Chris,
I'm sending this to you as I'm not sure who is responsible for
Mobility Contacts nowdays.
Can you please nudge the right folks to take a look at
https://qt.gitorious.org/qt-mobility/qt-mobility/merge_requests/37 or
advise me if I've submitted this to the wrong place?
Thanks,
Robin
I have what to answer but it will be totally useless waste of time.
Please, merge your changes to master, if Michael agreed.
26.09.2011, в 17:30, David Faure написал(а):
On Monday 26 September 2011 16:22:41 Иван Комиссаров wrote:
But i will not surprised if QtCreator will never use mime.
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 16:02:36 Olivier Goffart wrote:
On Monday 26 September 2011 15:40:01 Thiago Macieira wrote:
I know an asynchronous API is much harder to deal with and leads to more
complex code.
Not necessarily...
connect (manager-get(QNetworkRequest(url)),
Henry:
This list aims to be specific enough to describe what actually would
run in the continuous integration system, hence it mentions Ubuntu.
In the release documentation or product documentation, we should be
more generic, extrapolate, and include the other non-reference
platforms
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 14:15:45 henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
Yes. The release documentation should list where it was tested -- but it
can also document where it is reasonable to expect Qt to work (in other
words it is OK to extrapolate).
Agreed.
For example, if someone
Hi David,
On Monday 26 September 2011 15:46:12 ext Иван Комиссаров wrote:
In other news, I pushed the code for faster and more accurate glob
matching (currently in the 'david' branch).
Please, merge your changes to master, if Michael agreed.
please do so.
Thanks
Michael
The problem is that QtCreator's interfaces differs from mine. I mean not public
API, which almost the same, i mean glob weighted patterns and MagicMatchers. I
spent days to refactor them in the assumption that they will be public. Now all
that work can be reversed to make changes to Creator
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 05:01:15PM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Saturday, 24 de September de 2011 14:49:50 Peter Kuemmel wrote:
For instance qobject.h:
#ifndef QOBJECT_H
#define QOBJECT_H
#ifndef QT_NO_QOBJECT
#include QtCore/qobjectdefs.h
#include QtCore/qstring.h
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 17:48:27 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 05:01:15PM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Saturday, 24 de September de 2011 14:49:50 Peter Kuemmel wrote:
For instance qobject.h:
#ifndef QOBJECT_H
#define QOBJECT_H
#ifndef
Hi all.
I think Qt Creator is a red herring in this discussion. In case there will
be some incompatible implementation of some feature in Qt 5 it's up to the
Creator folks to handle the problem. It's all nice that you keep Creator
in mind, but from in my opinion really not needed in this
semi-OT:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 02:49:50PM +0200, ext Peter Kuemmel wrote:
Because of this I propose that in Qt5 the moc mechanism
should be expanded by the generation of public headers.
if one takes it further and allows pre-processing the actual source
code, one could solve the fragile
31 matches
Mail list logo
