On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 03:36:11 PM Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 June 2015 12:56:54 Knoll Lars wrote:
> [...]
>
> > * connect statements are hard with namespaces. Old style connects could
> > easily break if you forgot to fully qualify a parameter. New style
> > connects might end up wit
On Wednesday 17 June 2015 20:32:48 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> It seems that most people, but not everyone, in the discussion see the
> inconsistency and there are good reasons that it is not a good thing.
I *do* see the inconsistency. I'm just not convinced that it *matters*.
Paraphrasing Sharekspea
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Simon Hausmann
wrote:
> Or would the idea be to place the Q_DECLARE_METATYPE outside of the namespace?
Why "the idea"? It's the way it's supposed to be used right now.
Cheers,
--
Giuseppe D'Angelo
___
Development maili
Simon Hausmann schreef op 18-6-2015 om 09:08:
>
>>> * metatype registration is problematic with namespaced types, as the macro
>>> extracts the name of the type through the preprocessor. People can very
>>> easily end up registering the type multiple times with different
>>> (qualified vs non quali
Puh i this is a recurrent topic...
Ok in https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/113276/ says Björn Breitmayer "That explains why the SDK that was generated with Visual Studio 2012 ship a 2013 compiler" I have no clue how that could happen.
How should an sdk created by a vs2012 include a vs2
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2015 um 08:43 Uhr
Von: "Thiago Macieira"
An: development@qt-project.org
Betreff: Re: [Development] QtCS: Long Term Release discussion
On Thursday 18 June 2015 08:23:52 Gunnar Roth wrote:
> > Am 17.06.2015 um 22:35 schrieb Thiago Macieira
> > :
> >
>> > On Wedne
On Thursday 18 Jun 2015 09:18:15 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Simon Hausmann
>
> wrote:
> > Or would the idea be to place the Q_DECLARE_METATYPE outside of the
> > namespace?
> Why "the idea"? It's the way it's supposed to be used right now.
Indeed, and we've been
Hello Gunnar,
i still hadn't time to verify this, but. There is a platform builder for
WEC2013, if you generate the SDk with that one it should have the Visual
Studio 2013 compiler, at least thats how i read the knowledgebase article.
Its on my TODO list to verify this, but i still didn't had th
Sorry Visual Studio 2013
--
Björn Breitmeyer | bjoern.breitme...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
Germany: +49-30-521325470, Sweden (HQ): +46-563-540090
KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions
Am Donnerstag, 18. Juni 2015
Hi Björn,
what is "the knowledgebase article"? Would you mind to share a link?
And even if there would be a v18.00 compiler, what about the standard c++ library (headers, libs and dlls) where do they come from?
Or would then a mix of newer compiler and older std c++ libary be used? That coul
On 17/06/15 15:36,
"development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of
Marc Mutz" wrote:
>On Wednesday 17 June 2015 12:56:54 Knoll Lars wrote:
>[...]
>> * connect statements are hard with namespaces. Old style connects could
>> easily break if you forgot to fully q
On Thursday 18 June 2015 09:08:18 Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 03:36:11 PM Marc Mutz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 June 2015 12:56:54 Knoll Lars wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > > * connect statements are hard with namespaces. Old style connects could
> > > easily break if you forgot t
That would be this one,
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg154234.aspx
btw, i would assume the use of the newer libstdc++ if i got it right, as that
one comes from the sdk too. But maybe i am wrong, didn't gave this a lot of
time yet, which is why i couldn't test it yet.
--
Björn Breit
On Thursday 18 June 2015 11:37:48 Knoll Lars wrote:
> >Curiously, you didn't list any pro-namespace arguments. I don't know what
> >to make of this, but I fear that a decision is being made based solely
> >on arguments from one side.
>
> So what are the arguments from your point of view then? Apa
Hi Björn, i had the assumption you could mean that, but thats not a knowledge base article.
I think you mean "Compact 2013 uses the Microsoft Visual Studio 2013 compiler,"? That part was also sent to me by a colleage from another department when discussing v8 usage( as this has vs2013 depedancy a
Do you also advocate rules for using namespaces in Qt? What rules does KDE use?
>From following this thread, the rules that seem natural to me would be:
1. For a new module, either put everything in a namespace or don't use a
namespace at all.
2. If you put everything in a namespace:
2.1 The nam
On Thursday 18 Jun 2015 10:51:01 Smith Martin wrote:
> Do you also advocate rules for using namespaces in Qt? What rules does KDE
> use?
> >From following this thread, the rules that seem natural to me would be:
> 1. For a new module, either put everything in a namespace or don't use a
> namespace
On Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:45:53 PM Marc Mutz wrote:
[...]
> The meta-type system and moc are perfectly fine with namespaces. If people
> would just peek over their own noses and over to your cousin, KDE, you'd see
> that, say, kdepimlibs would have a very hard time indeed, if QMetaType or
> moc
Le jeudi 18 juin 2015 à 13:19 +0200, Simon Hausmann a écrit :
> On Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:45:53 PM Marc Mutz wrote:
> [...]
> > The meta-type system and moc are perfectly fine with namespaces. If people
> > would just peek over their own noses and over to your cousin, KDE, you'd see
> > that,
On Thursday 18 June 2015 12:51:01 Smith Martin wrote:
> Do you also advocate rules for using namespaces in Qt? What rules does KDE
> use?
I believe it's worth reading Sze Howe Koh's mails in this thread and the last
one (Oct 2013), even if the mails tend to be overwhelmingly full of
information
> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=theqtcompany.com@qt-
> project.org [mailto:development-
> bounces+kai.koehne=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of
> Marc Mutz
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:08 PM
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Develop
Why not leave current Qt modules as they are, without namespaces and with the Q
prefix on classes, and just introduce the option of adding a new module to Qt
by putting it in a namespace named QtFoo without the Q prefix on class names,
or adding it with no namespace and with the Q prefix on clas
That's a bug in Qt3D.
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/114639/
Cheers,
Sean
On Thursday 18 Jun 2015 13:19:24 Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:45:53 PM Marc Mutz wrote:
> [...]
>
> > The meta-type system and moc are perfectly fine with namespaces. If people
> > would
Or a bug in moc. I think that moc should always resolve the fully qualified
name and store that one in the generated tables. Otherwise these kind of errors
happen way too easily.
Cheers,
Lars
On 18/06/15 15:01,
"development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of
Sean
On Thursday 18 June 2015 12:49:40 Koehne Kai wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=theqtcompany.com@qt-
> > project.org [mailto:development-
> > bounces+kai.koehne=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of
> > Marc Mutz
> > Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015
On 2015-06-18 09:07, Marc Mutz wrote:
> 4. Includes:
>a. includes the whole module (as is the case for QtCore, ... now)
>b. There's no include for just the namespace (with enums, free
> functions, etc). To get the namespace, users include any class from the
> module (much like
On 18.06.2015 15:59, Smith Martin wrote:
> Why not leave current Qt modules as they are, without namespaces and with the
> Q prefix on classes, and just introduce the option of adding a new module to
> Qt by putting it in a namespace named QtFoo without the Q prefix on class
> names, or adding i
On Thursday 18 June 2015 15:45:06 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> On 2015-06-18 09:07, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > 4. Includes:
> >a. includes the whole module (as is the case for QtCore, ...
> >now) b. There's no include for just the namespace (with
> >enums, free
> >
> > functions, etc)
On 2015-06-18 11:17, Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Thursday 18 June 2015 15:45:06 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> Reasons I have used :
>>
>> - I want only the macros
>> - I want only the platform / compiler feature symbols
>> - I want only some free function (e.g. qRound)
>> - I want only the convenience typede
It's not included in the deprecation notice in 5.5.0-rc1's changelog.
And none of the features listed for 2013 are allowed in our code.
#if _MSC_VER >= 1800
/* C++11 features in VC12 = VC2013 */
# define Q_COMPILER_DEFAULT_MEMBERS
# define Q_COMPILER_DELETE_MEMBERS
# def
On Thursday 18 June 2015 18:16:30 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> > If you step back a bit, you'll notice that both and
> > , as well as are big, fat, mistakes.
>
> Why? How can QtNumeric, in particular, be a mistake unless qnumeric.h is
> also a mistake?
because is the header that brings in all of
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:22:07AM +0100, Sean Harmer wrote:
> On Thursday 18 Jun 2015 09:18:15 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Simon Hausmann
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Or would the idea be to place the Q_DECLARE_METATYPE outside of the
> > > namespace?
> > Why "the idea"
On 2015-06-18 16:33, Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Thursday 18 June 2015 18:16:30 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>>> If you step back a bit, you'll notice that both and
>>> , as well as are big, fat, mistakes.
>>
>> Why? How can QtNumeric, in particular, be a mistake unless qnumeric.h is
>> also a mistake?
>
>
Hello,
Using this testcase:
#include
#include
#include
int main(int argv, char **args)
{
QCoreApplication app(argv, args);
qDebug() << QCoreApplication::instance() << qApp;
QTimer::singleShot(0, qApp, SLOT(quit()));
return app.exec();
}
and building with ubuntu Qt pac
On Thursday 18 June 2015 23:29:43 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> ) I get incompatible runtime behavior:
>
> stephen@hal:/tmp/qtbug$ ./qtbug
> QObject(0x0) QObject(0x0)
> ^C
>
> That is, the QCoreApplication::instance() reports a null pointer in qDebug,
> and the singleShot does not work.
>
> This on
On Thursday 18 June 2015 21:49:38 André Pönitz wrote:
> So far no reason was given in favour of the additional inconsistencies
> that went beyond "I think it is posh" and "I want to have fun playing
> with the Qt API".
http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2015-June/022038.html
> Ther
On Thursday 18 June 2015 22:36:01 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> On 2015-06-18 16:33, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > On Thursday 18 June 2015 18:16:30 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> >>> If you step back a bit, you'll notice that both and
> >>> , as well as are big, fat, mistakes.
> >>
> >> Why? How can QtNumeric, in
On Thursday, June 11, 2015 02:21:22 AM Stottlemyer, Brett wrote:
> Hi Alan. Hi Simon.
>
> On 6/10/15, 4:23 PM, "Alan Alpert" <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 6:52 AM, Simon Hausmann
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, June 09, 2015 01:23:29 PM Alan Alpert wrote:
> >>> A brief
38 matches
Mail list logo
