On Wednesday, September 04, 2013 07:04:32 you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Friday, October 26, 2012 19:10:15 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> > QtBluetooth uses a namespace for public APIs, but QtLocation does not, for
> > example.
> >
> >The qtconnectivity repo will likely be part of Qt 5.2, but it is still not
> >
Hi,
On Friday, October 26, 2012 19:10:15 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> QtBluetooth uses a namespace for public APIs, but QtLocation does not, for
> example.
>The qtconnectivity repo will likely be part of Qt 5.2, but it is still not
>consistent - it uses a QtBluetooth and QtNfc. Both namespaces should b
Hi,
I don't know about QtJsonDb but QtPim has a few people interested in it
(Jolla for one, and Canonical for another). At the moment, development
resources dedicated to improving it are somewhat limited, but that
situation will change. If there's anything in particular which you think
needs cha
On Friday, October 26, 2012 19:10:15 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> QtBluetooth uses a namespace for public APIs, but QtLocation does not, for
> example.
Hello Sze-Howe,
The qtconnectivity repo will likely be part of Qt 5.2, but it is still not
consistent - it uses a QtBluetooth and QtNfc. Both namesp
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Sze Howe Koh wrote:
> I'll begin cleaning up the selected Qt 5.0 modules first, then move on
> to the others later.
The renaming of QtMultimedia and QtMultimedia::MetaData has been
submitted for review:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/38564
https://coder
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Knoll Lars wrote:
>> - QDoc loses all ability to differentiate between modules and namespaces
>
> In principle that's fixable in qdoc. If we were to start from scratch, I
> think QtNamespace would be more consistent, as it's the same as the module
> name. But it'
On Oct 27, 2012, at 6:08 PM, Sze Howe Koh wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> I think this is a good initiative. See also
>>
>> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,37727
>>
>> which is a move in the opposite direction.
>
> Thanks for replying, and for the
On Sunday, October 28, 2012 00:08:21 Sze Howe Koh wrote:
> //=
> // Analysis and conclusion
> //=
>
> Proposal 2 has more pros and fewer cons than Proposal 1. Proposal 1's
> strength is also present in Proposal 2, and Proposal 2's wea
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> I think this is a good initiative. See also
>
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,37727
>
> which is a move in the opposite direction.
Thanks for replying, and for the heads-up; I wasn't aware of Lars'
initiative (which I'll call Pro
On Friday, October 26, 2012 19:10:15 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> former Qt 5
Oops. I meant former Qt 4 here.
--
Stephen Kelly | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-
On Friday, October 26, 2012 23:34:32 Sze Howe Koh wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The first proposed change has been submitted to Gerrit, to give QSql its
> own camel-case header: https://codereview.qt-project.org/38294
>
> Does anyone have any objections/suggestions for the rest of this plan? If
> not, I'l
Hi all,
The first proposed change has been submitted to Gerrit, to give QSql its
own camel-case header: https://codereview.qt-project.org/38294
Does anyone have any objections/suggestions for the rest of this plan? If
not, I'll start working on the next part: Renaming some namespaces that
were in
Hi all,
Extending the discussion on good API naming schemes , I'd like to propose
some tweaks for the API.
To demonstrate the issues involved, here is a graphical overview of Qt's
current quirks:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B71n5SNZeRJybEd6ajhsQ1R4TVU/edit (compiled
mainly from documentation,
13 matches
Mail list logo
