Hi all!
In the wild people are doing all kinds of different things with Qt on the
network side. And there are some obvious issues with that given the
"callback" nature of Qt networking code.
One can see different examples of people over the years dealing with that:
http://cukic.co/2016/01/17/asy
On 28 December 2016 at 05:50, Petar Koretić wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> In the wild people are doing all kinds of different things with Qt on the
> network side. And there are some obvious issues with that given the
> "callback" nature of Qt networking code.
>
> One can see different examples of people
On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Ben Lau wrote:
>
>
> On 28 December 2016 at 05:50, Petar Koretić
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> In the wild people are doing all kinds of different things with Qt on the
>> network side. And there are some obvious issues with that given the
>> "callback" nature of Q
retić"
To: "Qt Project MailingList"
Subject: [Interest] QFuture, QAsync? Coroutines, Generators, Promises, Futures...
Hi all!
In the wild people are doing all kinds of different things with Qt on the network side. And there are some obvious issues with that given the "callback&
Yea, I do agree, but we are trying to make a framework that is friendly out
of the box, which still allows finer approaches, and threading is not
simple.
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 27, 2016 at 4:50 PM
> *From:* "Petar Koretić"
> *To:* "Qt Project MailingList"
> *S
On 28 December 2016 at 16:36, Petar Koretić wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Ben Lau wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 28 December 2016 at 05:50, Petar Koretić
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all!
>>>
>>> In the wild people are doing all kinds of different things with Qt on
>>> the network side. And there
All this discussion sounds like a bad joke: lets bring worse solutions from
worse environment, where the solution reinvented the wheel to hide
solution's poor design workaround
If you are not satisfied with current's Qt proposals (QThread, QThreadPool,
QConcurrent, QFuture, QEventLoop etc), probabl
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Vlad Stelmahovsky <
vladstelmahov...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> All this discussion sounds like a bad joke: lets bring worse solutions
> from worse environment, where the solution reinvented the wheel to hide
> solution's poor design workaround
> If you are not satisfie
On 31 December 2016 at 21:10, Ben Lau wrote:
>
>
> On 28 December 2016 at 16:36, Petar Koretić
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Ben Lau wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 December 2016 at 05:50, Petar Koretić
>>> wrote:
>>>
Hi all!
In the wild people are doing all k
2017-03-22 8:54 GMT+01:00 Ben Lau :
>
>
> On 31 December 2016 at 21:10, Ben Lau wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 28 December 2016 at 16:36, Petar Koretić
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Ben Lau wrote:
On 28 December 2016 at 05:50, Petar Koretić
wrote:
>>
On 22 March 2017 at 16:25, Elvis Stansvik wrote:
> 2017-03-22 8:54 GMT+01:00 Ben Lau :
> >
> >
> > On 31 December 2016 at 21:10, Ben Lau wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 28 December 2016 at 16:36, Petar Koretić
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 4:51 AM, Ben Lau wrote:
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
