Re: [Development] Proposing new Qt Creator module: Qt Creator Solutions
On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 11:25:16AM +0100, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development wrote: > On 30/11/2023 19:39, apoenitz wrote: > > I propose to make this setup an official Module of Qt Creator, and herewith > > also nominate Jarek as Maintainer. Jarek has been pushing the idea and is > > the > > author of the biggest existing Qt Creator Solution: TaskTree[2], so for me > > this > > is the obvious choice. > > > > Comments/questions/opinions? > > Just wondering if we could extend the scope: > do these solutions depend on QtCreator parts somehow? No, and not really planned now, but there are a few potential candidates that depend on each other (remote file and remote process access for instance). For now the idea is to have only "pure" Qt users there, but if the idea in general flies then at some time it's imaginable that "solutions" could depend on each other. > If not (I've understood that TaskTree specifically > doesn't), why not "just" going for a playground module? It's not feature-complete yet, and as long as there are still additions expected there are benefits to have that in-tree (e.g. atomic commit instead of submodules) that we currently believe to outweigh the benefits of a "physical" separation. But this also may change at some time. Andre' -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
[Development] Future of java-style iterators?
Hi, Some days ago we got an error report in the forum about QHashIterator, turned out to be a missing documentation for a complete class which remained unnoticed since Qt 6.0 (https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-119461). This leads to the question if we should deprecate all java-style iterators since they seem to be a) not widely used and b) it looks like we don't support them in a way we should. What do you think? Cheers, Christian -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Future of java-style iterators?
Hello, On 03/12/2023 21:56, Christian Ehrlicher wrote: Some days ago we got an error report in the forum about QHashIterator, turned out to be a missing documentation for a complete class which remained unnoticed since Qt 6.0 (https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-119461). This leads to the question if we should deprecate all java-style iterators since they seem to be a) not widely used and b) it looks like we don't support them in a way we should. What do you think? While any "serious" code should build under QT_NO_JAVA_STYLE_ITERATORS¹, how much maintenance do they cost us? There's been virtually 0 changes on them since Qt 6.0. ¹ We should of course open the chapter of having something that defines all these QOL macros. No one should be using the Java iterators. Here's a draft: https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/522833 My 2 c, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
