[Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Viironen Kalle
Hi, We’d like to have a bunch of new modules under qt-project. These are all needed in Qt Automotive Suite so let’s try to get this sorted out quickly to get things rolling nicely. New repositories needed are: * qt/qtapplicationmanager, Qt component for application lifecycle management *

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Turunen Tuukka
+1 -- Tuukka From: development-bounces+tuukka.turunen=theqtcompany@qt-project.org [mailto:development-bounces+tuukka.turunen=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Viironen Kalle Sent: tiistaina 13. lokakuuta 2015 10.35 To: development@qt-project.org Subject: [Development] New Qt

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Hausmann Simon
I think code that isn't specific to the automotive industry such as as the dbus integration should be integrated into existing modules unless there is a good reason otherwise. Just my two cents, Simon From: Viironen Kalle Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 09:35 To: development@qt-project.org

[Development] adding a custom entry to qmake's QT (or CONFIG?) commands

2015-10-13 Thread René J . V . Bertin
Hello, I'm experimenting with something that requires me to add an optional simple linker module (static library or even a .o object file) in the final step of the build process of an application (or library). It'd be part of QtBase (QtCore, even), and provide a means to control the behaviour

Re: [Development] adding a custom entry to qmake's QT (or CONFIG?) commands

2015-10-13 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:20:03AM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > I'm experimenting with something that requires me to add an optional > simple linker module (static library or even a .o object file) in the > final step of the build process of an application (or library). It'd > be part of

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Knoll Lars
I think the new repos are generally ok. The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is the dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase where the rest of the dbus code lives. So it’s either a separate repo, or we add it to the qtdeclarative repo.

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 08:53:21AM +, Hausmann Simon wrote: > I think code that isn't specific to the automotive industry such as as > the dbus integration should be integrated into existing modules unless > there is a good reason otherwise. > i said the same. ^^ it turns out that there are,

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:52:54AM +, Knoll Lars wrote: > The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is the > dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase where > the rest of the dbus code lives. So it’s either a separate repo, or we add > it to

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Knoll Lars
On 13/10/15 12:22, "Oswald Buddenhagen" wrote: >On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:52:54AM +, Knoll Lars wrote: >> The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is >>the >> dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase

Re: [Development] Qt 5.5.0 build issues on OS X : rpath

2015-10-13 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:39:29PM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > I can't remember, did I file a bug report on this, > that shouldn't be too hard to find out, no? ;) > or has the issue already been picked up? > i don't really understand the issue, so no. please have a close look at the status

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Tuesday 13 October 2015 09:52:54 Knoll Lars wrote: > The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is the > dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase where > the rest of the dbus code lives. So it’s either a separate repo, or we add > it to the

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Dominik Holland
qtdbusqml was written some time ago. Although it still works it has a lot of rough edges and i think it should go into the playground first. Dominik On 10/13/2015 11:52 AM, Knoll Lars wrote: > I think the new repos are generally ok. > > The only one I could see that could make sense in an

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread André Somers
Op 13-10-2015 om 12:22 schreef Oswald Buddenhagen: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:52:54AM +, Knoll Lars wrote: >> The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is the >> dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase where >> the rest of the dbus code

Re: [Development] 0 vs. NULL

2015-10-13 Thread René J . V . Bertin
Pocheptsov Timur wrote: Well, I know that (as in, I've been told it's the case, and I've seen examples where you cannot do regular, static casts), but that doesn't mean I understand it (nor does it mean I'm not willing to believe it!!). Worse, experience with ObjC interferes. There you can

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:07:00PM +0200, Dominik Holland wrote: > qtdbusqml was written some time ago. Although it still works it has a > lot of rough edges and i think it should go into the playground first. > that's still qt/qtdbusqml as far as repos are concerned. or

Re: [Development] adding a custom entry to qmake's QT (or CONFIG?) commands

2015-10-13 Thread René J . V . Bertin
Sorry, this should have gone to the list at once. Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: Thanks, If anything this led me to the "Adding new configuration features" chapter in the QMake documentation. :) > qtcore_be_insane: DEFINES += QTCORE_BE_INSANE > SOURCES += $$PWD/data/qtcore_insanity.cpp > >

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Tuesday 13 October 2015 07:35:14 Viironen Kalle wrote: > * qt/qtapplicationmanager, Qt component for application lifecycle management > * qt/qtivi, Qt IVI extensible platform abstraction layer I'd like more information on what's on these. What's application lifecycle management? Is

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Dominik Holland
Am 13.10.15 um 16:09 schrieb Thiago Macieira: > On Tuesday 13 October 2015 09:52:54 Knoll Lars wrote: >> The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is the >> dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase where >> the rest of the dbus code lives. So

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Dominik Holland
Am 13.10.15 um 16:15 schrieb Thiago Macieira: > On Tuesday 13 October 2015 07:35:14 Viironen Kalle wrote: >> * qt/qtapplicationmanager, Qt component for application lifecycle > management >> * qt/qtivi, Qt IVI extensible platform abstraction layer > > I'd like more information on what's

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-13 Thread Jake Petroules
> On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:46 PM, Marc Mutz wrote: > > Hi, > > After looking quite a bit into the current state of string handling in Qt for > my QtWS talk last week, I have become frustrated by the state of string > handling in Qt. > > We have such powerful tools for

Re: [Development] adding a custom entry to qmake's QT (or CONFIG?) commands

2015-10-13 Thread René J . V . Bertin
Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > src/corelib/corelib.pro: > > ... > MODULE_CONFIG += qtcore_insanity I must have done something wrong, because this addition gave me a QtCore with the additional module included. It's not supposed to be added to Qt libraries. > user_project.pro: > > ... > CONFIG

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-13 Thread Bubke Marco
I like idea to devide the job of manipulating data and sending data around in different classes. Many times I get string from different sources in different formats with different ownerships. And for performance reasons you don't want copy or convert that strings. Many sources like databases

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Johan Thelin
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Tuesday 13 October 2015 18:01:31 Dominik Holland wrote: >> Am 13.10.15 um 16:15 schrieb Thiago Macieira: >> > On Tuesday 13 October 2015 07:35:14 Viironen Kalle wrote: >> >> * qt/qtapplicationmanager, Qt

[Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-13 Thread Marc Mutz
Hi, After looking quite a bit into the current state of string handling in Qt for my QtWS talk last week, I have become frustrated by the state of string handling in Qt. We have such powerful tools for string handling (QStringRef, QStringBuilder), but all APIs outside QString and its

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

2015-10-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Tuesday 13 October 2015 18:01:31 Dominik Holland wrote: > Am 13.10.15 um 16:15 schrieb Thiago Macieira: > > On Tuesday 13 October 2015 07:35:14 Viironen Kalle wrote: > >> * qt/qtapplicationmanager, Qt component for application lifecycle > > > > management > > > >> * qt/qtivi, Qt IVI

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

2015-10-13 Thread Matthew Woehlke
On 2015-10-13 15:59, Jake Petroules wrote: > On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:46 PM, Marc Mutz wrote: >> I would therefore like to propose to abandon QString for new API (and over >> time phase it out of existing API), and only provide (const QChar*, size_t) >> as >> the most general form. I would propose