On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Elvis Stansvik <elvst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Alright, then I misunderstood. Sorry about that!
> I didn't mean to start a debate at all, and agree with everything you said. > No need for apologies, I'm not looking to place blame or start a feud, just trying to make clear what was meant in my previous mail(s). > All I wanted to say was that the reentrant definition that Qt uses in > its docs does not guarantee that the const methods are safe to call on > the same instance from different threads (even if they likely are). > On this we most certainly agree. > Anyway, Jason solved his problem, so all is well :) > Yes, which really is the important thing. :) Kind regards, Konstantin.
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
