On Thursday 08 October 2015 11:55:52 André Somers wrote:
[...]
> Nowadays, for code that you won't need to compile with non C++/11
> complient compilers, I'd recommend to use nullptr instead. At least,
> nullptr will always be interpretted as a pointer.
[...]
Seconded. I'd go so far as to use
On 16 September 2015 at 15:46, Jake Petroules
wrote:
> > On Sep 15, 2015, at 9:07 PM, Sze Howe Koh wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There's a list of platform-specific functions from Qt 4:
> > http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/exportedfunctions.html
> >
> >
Well, that's a static type system.
I would explain this 'asymmetry' as:
some_pointer_type -> pointer_to_void conversion is safe (given that it's
possible at all, since not every pointer type can be implicitly converted to
void *).
while hypothetical (non-existent) implicit
pointer_to_void ->
>
> On Wednesday 23 September 2015 08:37:54 Heikkinen Jani wrote:
> > We are targeting to release Qt 5.5.1 as soon as possible, most probably
> > during next week.
>
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Gerhard Scheikl
wrote:
> Hi
>
> Could you please give us a new estimate?
>
On Friday October 09 2015 13:58:37 Pocheptsov Timur wrote:
> if NULL was (void *)0 - you'd have a compilation error in C++, since there is
> no such implicit conversion.
>
> And yes, void * in C++ can be indeed considered generic, because you can do
> this:
>
> int * p = ...
> void * pv = p;
Hi,
I've been doing release builds of Qt 4.8.7 that do contain debug information.
I'm not aware of any relevant configure flags for Qt 4 like Qt 5 has, so I'm
setting -g in the *C*FLAGS env. variables.
That works, but on OS X I find that ObjC++ files (*.mm) are compiled without -g
and thus
On Friday 09 October 2015 10:40:44 charleyb123 . wrote:
> A couple weeks have gone by, and I've not seen "Meeting Minutes" from
> recent release-team-meetings.
>
> Do we have a feel for timing? (I'm in a similar scenario as Gerhard.)
There was no meeting this week because of the Qt World
On 2015-10-09 11:51, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> On Friday October 09 2015 13:58:37 Pocheptsov Timur wrote:
>> And yes, void * in C++ can be indeed considered generic, because
>> you can do this:
>>
>> int * p = ... void * pv = p;
>
> Coming from C I have some trouble with that concept of generic