Re: [Interest] QML engine, C++ model in secondary thread, signal lag, and infinite change loop

2020-03-17 Thread Stephen Bryant
On 17/03/2020 11:30, Federico Ferri wrote: [...] > QML Engine <—> Proxy QObject <—> QObject model [worker QThread] [...] > Where is the flaw in my design? "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other."

Re: [Interest] QJSEngine replacement for QScriptEngine misses newFunction

2016-02-23 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi Stefan, On Tuesday 23 February 2016 05:34:03 Walter Stefan wrote: [...] > > And in this way. I can use it then in the script: > value = sqrt(4); > > I actually don't want to map a whole QObject, because that would require a > call like this: value = MyMath.sqrt(4); > > Is there any way to

Re: [Interest] Styling a single QTreeWidgetItem

2013-03-07 Thread Stephen Bryant
On 06/03/2013 16:54, André Somers wrote: Op 6-3-2013 16:19, Sensei schreef: I don't know if this is possible, but how can I style a single QTreeWidgetItem? [...] Use a custom delegate. libQxt contains QxtItemDelegate[1] that styles the root nodes in trees in a different way. That could

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi, On Wednesday 02 May 2012 10:44:36 Jason H wrote: Intel has the x86 Andoid problem fixed with binary translation. Your NDK arguments are moot. I disagree. Firstly, Intel's binary translator won't help those with MIPS devices. Secondly, it doesn't work with all apps. Here's a quote from

Re: [Interest] qt vs web-runtime

2012-05-02 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi, On Wednesday 02 May 2012 21:41:33 Harri Pasanen wrote: [...] Binary compatibility with phones/tablets is more than just CPU. As soon as you start accessing Camera, GPS, etc. you typically need to test on device. Screen resolution, GPUs , RAM, storage memory all differ, so even if you

Re: [Interest] Where to catch exception when a qml plugin is loaded? Even possible?

2012-04-26 Thread Stephen Bryant
Hi, N, throwing from a constructor is fine. Throwing from a destructor is a big no no. Actually there is no other way to cleanly 'get out' when construction fails. Ooohh... big disagreement coming up here!! Consider this line: Foo *foo = new Foo(); Assuming 'new' succeeds and