Re: [Development] Suggested improvements to JIRA

1) Can't be done 2) Possible, requires permission scheme modification. "Manage Watchers" needs to have the "Engineer" project role added 3) the decision seems to have been made to enable a "Contributor" role in the discussion concluded in http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/jeg/2012-March/000

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Found in here: http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2012-April/003391.html Thanks again! 2012/4/23 Loaden > Thiago Macieira has already answered your question. ;-) > > I does't receive the email from Thiago Macieira. &&&>***? any thing wrong? > I am use gmail from web browser. > Do

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

> > Thiago Macieira has already answered your question. ;-) I does't receive the email from Thiago Macieira. &&&>***? any thing wrong? I am use gmail from web browser. Does anyone could post the mail to me again? thanks!!! 2012/4/23 1+1=2 > Thiago Macieira has already answered your question. ;-

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Thiago Macieira has already answered your question. ;-) On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Loaden wrote: >> Seems you still use two different sets of source code. > The current question is: Shall we need or no-need to use UTF-8 encoding as > default? > I thought we should use UTF-8 as default, Be

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

To clear for my previous post. Under Linux + GCC4.6.x, We can use UTF-8 BOM in *source* files, not in *header* files. So if use UTF-8 encoding and with BOM, the source file should can cross-platform. In Creator, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/11851 It's easy to add/delete UTF-8 BOM now. 201

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

> > Seems you still use two different sets of source code. > * Under MSVC 2010, source files saved as UTF8 with BOM. > * Under Linux GCC, source files saved as UTF8 without BOM. No, Under Linux GCC, the source files saved as UTF-8 *with* BOM too. It's works fine when it's Windows either Linux. S

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

IMO, codecForXXX() is really a good news for China users. In the past three years, I noticed that too many newcomers using these functions in a wrong way. such as {{{ QTextCodec *codec = QTextCodec::codecForName("System"); QTextCodec::setCodecForLocale(codec); QTextCodec::setCodecForCStrings(cod

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Hi Loaden, Seems you still use two different sets of source code. * Under MSVC 2010, source files saved as UTF8 with BOM. * Under Linux GCC, source files saved as UTF8 without BOM. which means your application is not corss-platform. And of course, this is a defect of C++ instead of Qt. You sh

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Hi Loden, The source code you provided if not cross-platform even under Qt4. Under Windows platform, source file is save using encoding "GBK" while under linux platform it saved as "UTF-8" which means you are using two sets of source code for two platforms. In addition, these are two errors(mis

[Development] QtPrintSupport - Platform Support

Hi, While starting to review the current state of QtPrintSupport for Beta 1 and one thing I've immediately noticed is an inconsistency in the platform implementations as to which plugins have which classes where. OSX: src/plugins/platforms/cocoa- QMacPrintEngine

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

On domingo, 22 de abril de 2012 22.54.14, Loaden wrote: > > There has also been talk about making QString's char* methods use to > > utf8 (meaning you'd be able to use QString foo("bunçh øf u†f8 here"); > > and it'd work fine, but I never got around to writing that, I don't > > know if anyone else

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

> > There has also been talk about making QString's char* methods use to > utf8 (meaning you'd be able to use QString foo("bunçh øf u†f8 here"); > and it'd work fine, but I never got around to writing that, I don't > know if anyone else has started yet. Sorry for my poor english. I just full under

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Thanks for help!! I just test on Windows 7 (MSVC2010) and Linux (GCC 4.6.2), both (Win / Linux, Qt4 / Qt5) works well use below code. > #include > #include > #include > int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > { > #ifdef Q_CC_MSVC > #pragma execution_character_set("UTF-8") > #endif > QAppli

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

On 22 April 2012 11:50, Loaden wrote: >>  (I don't have any clue about MSVC). > > That the point! In current solution, It's does't work for this case if use > MSVC Compiler. > My Point: > Please don't think about of MSVC users. > Or, please give me a way to fix the problem. I don't know. If that

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

2012/4/22 Thiago Macieira : > Any compiler or text editor that can't understand UTF-8 (without a BOM) will > receive from me the label of "crap" and will not take into consideration the > problems users using them have with the plan above. Well, they'd also be able to use QTextCodec directly to ac

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > You can do that -- as I said in my link, that requires that the > compiler emits UTF-8 as the execution charset for that literal. MSVC apparently has a bug here, but it is possible to do (with a workaround); http://support.microsoft.com

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

After test, I can sure this code can works well on Windows 32bit + MSVC2010 or Linux 64bit + GCC4.6.2 with Qt4. But can't work with Qt5. Please give me a sulution about this case. > > #include > #include > #include > #include > #include > > int main(int argc, char *argv[]) > { > #ifdef Q_WS_W

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

> > (I don't have any clue about MSVC). > That the point! In current solution, It's does't work for this case if use MSVC Compiler. My Point: Please don't think about of MSVC users. Or, please give me a way to fix the problem. 2012/4/22 Giuseppe D'Angelo > You can do that -- as I said in my link

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

On domingo, 22 de abril de 2012 17.11.13, Loaden wrote: > Thanks for reply! I don't care the reason now, I just want know how to make > it work. > I am try UTF-8 of the source file, with or not with UTF-8 BOM, and try > fromLatin1/Utf8/Ascii too. > And all tried is failed! I'd like to point out th

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

On 22 April 2012 10:36, Loaden wrote: > The question is: I don't want use utf-8 code in source files, like this: >> >> QString str = QString::fromUtf8("\xc3\xb7"); > > > I just want directly use the "÷" in source file. And I don't need know what > is the utf-8 code of "÷". Like this: >> >> QString

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

The question is: I don't want use utf-8 code in source files, like this: > QString str = > QString > ::fromUtf8("\xc3\xb7"); I just want directly use the "÷" in source file. And I don't need know what is the utf-8

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

2012/4/22 Loaden : > Thanks for reply! I don't care the reason now, I just want know how to make > it work. > I am try UTF-8 of the source file, with or not with UTF-8 BOM, and try > fromLatin1/Utf8/Ascii too. > And all tried is failed! > > In MSVC2010, If use some Chinese (CJK) strings, We have to

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Thanks for reply! I don't care the reason now, I just want know how to make it work. I am try UTF-8 of the source file, with or not with UTF-8 BOM, and try fromLatin1/Utf8/Ascii too. And all tried is failed! In MSVC2010, If use some Chinese (CJK) strings, We have to save the source file as UTF-8 w

Re: [Development] How to create new Qt modules or tools

Hi, > I am missing the recommendation for certain folders in there, like > 1) doc: probably most important since modules should be documented. > 2) examples: this is probably also important because examples would be > nice to have for the add-on modules as well. I edited the location for doc to b

Re: [Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

2012/4/22 Loaden : > Hi, All! I am only a physics teacher from China.  It makes me confused  that > I just noticed the codecFor... function is removed for now. It's removed primarily for sanity reasons. Not being able to reliably know what fromAscii/toAscii are actually going to do mean that they

[Development] Why we *have to* remove codecFor... ?

Hi, All! I am only a physics teacher from China. It makes me confused that I just noticed the codecFor... function is removed for now. See: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,14626 https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,14999 But please let's me know how to make this work with **MSVC20

Re: [Development] Qt 4.8.2 content freeze coming soon

Hey, Akseli! Good news: I got another GCC update today (still 4.7.0, probably with some distro-specific patches) and now Qt builds again. So I'll abondon my patch. Best Regards, Tobias Tobias Hunger Software Engineer Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks Nokia gate5 GmbH Firmensitz: Invalidenstr. 1

Re: [Development] The place of QML

Yes, it is strongly biased due to the wording. Fix the wording and post it anyways. The numbers will not change. I got bored and drew a pretty picture to summarize my feelings for QML: http://bayimg.com/jaooAAaDC Hope you laugh. But back to being serious. How can anybody in the QML camp argue aga