On Thursday 03 October 2013 10:38:59 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 10:36:44, Olivier Goffart wrote:
I dislike allowing this via the signal-slot mechanism because I see
throwing from a slot as incompatible with the connection semantics.
That would mean
On Thursday 10 October 2013 15:14:02 André Somers wrote:
Op 10-10-2013 14:53, Olivier Goffart schreef:
On Thursday 03 October 2013 10:38:59 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 10:36:44, Olivier Goffart wrote:
I dislike allowing this via the signal-slot mechanism
On Thursday, October 10, 2013 9:26 AM, Olivier Goffart oliv...@woboq.com
wrote:
On Thursday 10 October 2013 15:14:02 André Somers wrote:
Op 10-10-2013 14:53, Olivier Goffart schreef:
On Thursday 03 October 2013 10:38:59 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013
On Thursday 10 October 2013 08:22:44 BRM wrote:
I have personnally maintained a 400k+ SLOC codebase based on QT.
It made extensive use of Signals/Slots between objects. Even though I was
pretty much the only developer working on it, I still had to quite often
track through signals/slots to
On 10/10/13 6:02 PM, Olivier Goffart oliv...@woboq.com wrote:
On Thursday 10 October 2013 08:22:44 BRM wrote:
I have personnally maintained a 400k+ SLOC codebase based on QT.
It made extensive use of Signals/Slots between objects. Even though I
was
pretty much the only developer working on
On quinta-feira, 10 de outubro de 2013 13:54:09, Alex Malyushytskyy wrote:
It never worked.with other than direct connections.
As I see it there is a simple choice either to provide indirect connections
or propagate exceptions to signal. Otherwise you always have to assume that
every slot is
On Thursday 03 October 2013 18:38:44 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 17:11:54, Alex Malyushytskyy wrote:
Assuming exceptions are enabled for signal/slots what is going to happen
with Qt::QueuedConnection?
As far as I understand at this point you can't catch
On 2013-10-04 07:34, Kurt Pattyn wrote:
In some markets like Avionics and Defense, it is simply forbidden for
us to use exceptions.
The only reason to forbid exceptions on technical (as opposed to
uneducated or -worse- political) grounds is in hard real-time systems,
because throwing an
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 09:30:58 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 07:13:11, Knoll Lars wrote:
+1. It's our decision not to use exceptions in Qt code, but I see quite a
bit of value in being able to throw exceptions from a slot if that's the
pattern a
:
From: Julien Blanc julien.bl...@nmc-company.fr
Subject: Re: [Development] Disabling exception support in QtCore?
Date: 3 Oct 2013 11:10:21 GMT+02:00
To: development@qt-project.org
Le 03/10/2013 10:36, Olivier Goffart a écrit :
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 09:30:58 Thiago Macieira wrote
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 10:36:44, Olivier Goffart wrote:
I dislike allowing this via the signal-slot mechanism because I see
throwing from a slot as incompatible with the connection semantics.
That would mean any signal could throw ANY exception. It would also
preempt
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 09:43:18, Marc Mutz wrote:
Qt is a general-purpose framework library. As a library, its *only*
purpose is to serve its users; as a framework, it mandates a certain
structure on programs using it. As a general-purpose library, it can
only assume very little
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Thiago Macieira
thiago.macie...@intel.comwrote:
On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 17:11:54, Alex Malyushytskyy wrote:
Assuming exceptions are enabled for signal/slots what is going to happen
with Qt::QueuedConnection?
As far as I understand at this
2013/10/4 Kurt Pattyn pattyn.k...@gmail.com:
In some markets like Avionics and Defense, it is simply forbidden for us to
use exceptions.
So, at least I think it should be possible to disable them in Qt if it was
decided to allow them, otherwise we would be forced to use another
framework.
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 05:42:24, Knoll Lars wrote:
On 01.10.13 23:23, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 20:00:56, Knoll Lars wrote:
Yes, signal/slot connections between user code should IMO still be able
to
pass through
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 06:57:01, Thomas Sondergaard wrote:
On 2013-10-01 21:20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our container
classes, the only thing that currently needs exception support is the
mainloop allowing std::bad_alloc
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 23:32:00 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 05:42:24, Knoll Lars wrote:
On 01.10.13 23:23, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 20:00:56, Knoll Lars wrote:
Yes, signal/slot connections
On 02.10.13 09:09, Olivier Goffart oliv...@woboq.com wrote:
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 23:32:00 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 05:42:24, Knoll Lars wrote:
On 01.10.13 23:23, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com
wrote:
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 07:13:11, Knoll Lars wrote:
+1. It's our decision not to use exceptions in Qt code, but I see quite a
bit of value in being able to throw exceptions from a slot if that's the
pattern a developer chooses to use. We've been doing quite a bit of work
to allow
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 09:09:16, Olivier Goffart wrote:
It is working. We even got bug report for some corner case where it did
not, and I fixed those. (so they are used)
There is no test because you did not want to have one. But we could easily
add more auto tests. (It is
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 06:57:01AM +0200, Thomas Sondergaard wrote:
On 2013-10-01 21:20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our container
classes, the only thing that currently needs exception support is the
mainloop allowing std::bad_alloc
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:39 PM, André Pönitz
andre.poen...@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de wrote:
On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 06:57:01AM +0200, Thomas Sondergaard wrote:
On 2013-10-01 21:20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our container
classes, the
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 20:39:25, André Pönitz wrote:
Size overhead for just enabling exceptions is (of course depending on
actual model/implementation) typically cited as 5-10%, which incidentally
matches Thiago's findings for Qt Core rather well. That's a pretty high
price for
Hmm question - certainly worth it for sjlj platforms like 32-bit ios.
One thing I'd love to see is the ability to throw exceptions through meta-call
invocations (would be useful for qml, which uses exceptions)
Simon
Fra: Thiago Macieira
Sendt: 21:20 tirsdag 1. oktober 2013
Til:
Thiago wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our container
classes,
the only thing that currently needs exception support is the mainloop
allowing
std::bad_alloc through.
Is it worth it?
Should we disable exceptions in QtCore?
No, and yes. ;-))
I vote not
Yes, signal/slot connections between user code should IMO still be able to
pass through exceptions. I am afraid removing that will break code that's
out there.
Cheers,
Lars
On 10/1/13 9:31 PM, Hausmann Simon simon.hausm...@digia.com wrote:
Hmm question - certainly worth it for sjlj platforms
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 12:20:29PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our container
classes,
the only thing that currently needs exception support is the mainloop
allowing
std::bad_alloc through.
Is it worth it?
Given that hoping that
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 19:31:05, Hausmann Simon wrote:
Hmm question - certainly worth it for sjlj platforms like 32-bit ios.
One thing I'd love to see is the ability to throw exceptions through
meta-call invocations (would be useful for qml, which uses exceptions)
The rule is:
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 20:00:56, Knoll Lars wrote:
Yes, signal/slot connections between user code should IMO still be able to
pass through exceptions. I am afraid removing that will break code that's
out there.
This is already forbidden since 5.0.
You can throw from your slots,
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 22:28:53, André Pönitz wrote:
Perhaps... do we have numbers how much the gain would actually be, say,
for code size?
Give me an hour.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 21:20:29 Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our
container classes, the only thing that currently needs exception
support is the mainloop allowing std::bad_alloc through.
Is it worth it?
Should we disable exceptions in
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 22:28:53, André Pönitz wrote:
Perhaps... do we have numbers how much the gain would actually be, say,
for code size?
All numbers are based on my own QtCore tree, which contains a lot of patches
on top of current stable, including protected visibility. I
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 00:04:58, Christoph Feck wrote:
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 21:20:29 Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our
container classes, the only thing that currently needs exception
support is the mainloop allowing
On Wednesday 02 October 2013 00:41:56 Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 00:04:58, Christoph Feck
wrote:
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 21:20:29 Thiago Macieira wrote:
Should we disable exceptions in QtCore?
If it allows us to get a backtrace actually showing
On quarta-feira, 2 de outubro de 2013 01:03:19, Christoph Feck wrote:
In order to properly do that, we should remove all try/catch blocks
in QtCore and replace with scoped pointers and scoped values. We
should let the destructors handle the cleanup.
Sounds a bit more work than simply
On 2013-10-01 21:20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Since we decided to roll back support for exceptions in our container classes,
the only thing that currently needs exception support is the mainloop allowing
std::bad_alloc through.
Is it worth it?
Should we disable exceptions in QtCore?
As an
On 01.10.13 23:23, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On terça-feira, 1 de outubro de 2013 20:00:56, Knoll Lars wrote:
Yes, signal/slot connections between user code should IMO still be able
to
pass through exceptions. I am afraid removing that will break code
that's
out there.
37 matches
Mail list logo
