On Monday 27 June 2011 11:32:05 ext Ivan Cukic wrote:
It is not possible to use latest compilers on every platform. For
example, we are still stuck to gcc 2.95 for one of embedded platforms.
I am aware of those situations, but I'd rather /fix/ those than to keep the
code ugly just so that
Hi,
I Have been working on the new syntax for signals and slot.
http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/New_Signal_Slot_Syntax
It looks like that.
connect(sender, Sender::valueChanged,
receiver, Receiver::updateValue );
The idea is too have more check at compile time (typos, type checking,
On Wednesday 24 August 2011 21:45:11 Harri Porten wrote:
I have a question on namespaces:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
Qt Add-On modules would work as follows:
[...]
- C++ namespace is required and it is QtPim for the Qt Pim add-on
module etc. We can have
On Saturday 27 August 2011 10:01:56 Andre Somers wrote:
Op 26-8-2011 13:54, henry.haveri...@nokia.com schreef:
I suppose the goal of this exception is to keep source compatibility.
(forward delcaration would break if the namespace change) So I would
say yes, modules which are meant to keep
On Tuesday 13 September 2011 10:42:53 Gábor Lehel wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 3:51 AM, aaron.kenn...@nokia.com wrote:
Hi,
On 12/09/2011, at 11:04 PM, ext Sylvain Pointeau wrote:
QtScript should be using V8 and provide all the facilities of binding
QtObjects...
(it is using
On Wednesday 14 September 2011 11:06:02 Keith Gardner wrote:
I was wondering if QtConcurrent could be modified to use Variadic Template
Arguments for the run function since this feature is now available with
C++11?
It would not be that easy because of the current implementation design of
On Thursday 22 September 2011 08:18:49 Frans Klaver wrote:
[...]
I'm still not convinced that the trade-off is worth your while, but you
obviously think it is. There's downsides and upsides to both approaches.
Compile-time check is one thing, but there is also other advantage of the new
code.
On Friday 30 September 2011 12:57:28 Kent Hansen wrote:
Hi,
You might have seen Thiago's blog about QStringLiteral [1], and his idea
on replacing QLatin1String usage by QStringLiteral in Qt (where possible).
I like the idea, but wanted to do some benchmarking first to get an
impression of
On Friday 30 September 2011 16:55:53 Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Great news! Is it possible to use this superfast QStringLiteral with Qt 4.x?
No. This is a binary incompatible change in QString.
___
Qt5-feedback mailing list
Qt5-feedback@qt.nokia.com
On Monday 03 October 2011 16:25:45 Lorn Potter wrote:
Hi,
Currently, there are 3 instances of QMetaObjectBuilder, in QtDeclarative,
QtSystems (serviceframework) and QtSystems (publish and subscribe). There
are only trivial changes between these existing versions of
QMetaObjectBuilder
On Friday 07 October 2011 15:14:33 Daniel Mendizabal wrote:
To All,
[...]
Hi,
But what happen now when new mobile phones come with Qt5 without QWidget
support?
I wonder how the message could have been given so wrong.
I'm not speaking for the Qt team. But while Qt team thinks QML is the
On Friday 07 October 2011 14:27:20 Till Oliver Knoll wrote:
[...]
But recently it turned out that the whole paint stack, the scene
graph, will be completely rewritten, to favour the QML architecture.
The scene graph is a technology that has been writen specifically for QML,
If you want to
On Thursday 13 October 2011 12:22:39 Simon Hausmann wrote:
Hey,
There are plenty of source incompatible changes going into the Qt 5 modules.
This can make development of depending modules difficult.
I recall that the KDE 4 development cycle had similar issues, and I have
vague memories of
On Thursday 13 October 2011 15:47:49 Harri Porten wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Samuel Rødal wrote:
But we're planning to make the xcb plugin the officially supported
platform plugin on X11, the xlib plugin is mainly there for reference
(it's not as full-featured as the xcb plugin).
On Sunday 16 October 2011 16:30:39 Thiago Macieira wrote:
When I talked to João this week, he expressed the desire to unify the header
code of QVector, QByteArray and QString. Since QByteArray is a vector of
char and QString is a vector of QChar / ushort, it makes sense to unify the
code to
On Sunday 16 October 2011 16:21:40 Thiago Macieira wrote:
[...]
Option 3: make it QListT be an actual QVectorT for movable types, maybe
with an upper limit of size (32 bytes, 128 bytes?).
- pros: suitable for all types, shares code
- cons: more complex to implement, more code to compile and
On Sunday 16 October 2011 18:59:08 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Sunday, 16 de October de 2011 17:12:33 Olivier Goffart wrote:
One big difference between QList and QVector today is that QList has
prepend / takeFirst optimisation, whereas QVector must move all
elements to accommodate. I would
On Monday 17 October 2011 10:31:36 João Abecasis wrote:
On Oct 16, 2011, at 6:57 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
One thing I would like to add is the hash, for QString (and potentialy
QByteArray)
see: http://qt.gitorious.org/qt/qtbase/merge_requests/62
We discussed that but we're not
On Monday 17 October 2011 20:54:47 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Monday, 17 de October de 2011 19:33:07 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 02:55:53PM +0200, Knoll Lars (Nokia-MP-Qt/Oslo)
wrote:
Why would we want to add a wrapper for char's?
why again do we have a wrapper
On Friday 21 October 2011 19:50:33 Mark wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Mark mark...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I want to adjust QShortcut to use it for global shortcuts as well and
would like to lay out my idea on how i intend to do that. Any feedback
on it would be more then
20 matches
Mail list logo
