Hi Oswald,
> the more pragmatic approach is to "hide" the qt6 variant behind ifdefs.
If that is the "official" way, fine with me.
> note that the qt(core) code is already full of QT_VERSION_CHECK(6,0,0)
> which does effectively the same, but to activate it you would need to
> change .qmake.conf instead of just calling configure -qt6.
Ok, I'll try this next time, seems like a sensible solution.
I've also played a bit with the comment hjk gave me in [1] and it seems
some of the changes can even be done for Qt5 - which is even better.
I hereby declare that for now I don't need a wip branch, as enough other
possiblities exist.
Thanks for your time.
Regards,
André
[1] https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-64145
Am 02.10.2018 um 13:08 schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen:
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 10:37:24AM +0200, André Hartmann wrote:
I allready have some ideas for QCanBusDevice which requires
binary-incompatible changes and therefore needs to be done for Qt6 [1].
To be able to already start the work, I'm hereby requesting a wip branch
that could be merged when the "real" Qt6 development begins.
The advantage would be, that others could already pick up that changes
and test them, which hopefully will improve the code quality.
the more pragmatic approach is to "hide" the qt6 variant behind ifdefs.
in fact, the introduction of a respective configure feature (so you
would #if QT_CONFIG(qt6)) has been on the table for quite a while
already, but nobody pushed for it yet, presumably because we haven't
officially started qt6 yet.
note that the qt(core) code is already full of QT_VERSION_CHECK(6,0,0)
which does effectively the same, but to activate it you would need to
change .qmake.conf instead of just calling configure -qt6.
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
