On 19.05.2014 10:57, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 05:29:56PM +0200, Adam Strzelecki wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I wonder if there was any work done in regards of making Ninja Qmake
>> generator. From my experience Ninja vastly improves (re)build time.
>
>> I wonder if it would be
On 30.05.2014 23:59, Adam Strzelecki wrote:
> Moreover it takes more to build qt-creator with Qbs (20min) than Qmake+make
> (18min). Also it doesn't support precompiled headers, at least not for
> qt-creator, where Qmake+make+PCH goes down to 9min.
Strange, I thought qbs improves build times.
>
Sorry for the formatting guys. Corporate email is Outlook, so I'm manually
trying
to be polite and bottom post.
> Hello Brett
Hi Thiago
> I again support the creation of the repository. We'll have to discuss
> whether this can become part of the Qt standard release because
> of the overlap
> Welcome to the community.
Thanks!
> I just have a question: does QQSM build on top of the QStateMachine
> framework, or does it replace completely?
> If the latter, is there any plan to integrate them again?
Hi Thiago. Sorry I wasn't clear. This uses the QStateMachine framework
directly.
Em sex 30 maio 2014, às 22:57:02, Stottlemyer, Brett escreveu:
> I'd like to officially request a sandbox for: Replicant
Hello Brett
I again support the creation of the repository. We'll have to discuss whether
this can become part of the Qt standard release because of the overlap in
requiremen
Em sex 30 maio 2014, às 22:14:34, Stottlemyer, Brett escreveu:
> While QML already has a State type, this is not a complete, deterministic
> state machine. This is an overly simplified state machine, in that it
> provides little in terms of error checking or nested states.
>
> The proposed QQSM m
Hi list,
My name is Brett Stottlemyer, here with my 2nd sandbox request. I work for
Ford Motor Company, and Ford has graciously agreed to let us contribute some of
the cool stuff we've developed back to Qt. We aren't quite done with
everything yet (still waiting on the Corporate CLA), but I w
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) <
bstot...@ford.com> wrote:
> Hi list,
>
>
>
> My name is Brett Stottlemyer. I work for Ford Motor Company, and Ford has
> graciously agreed to let us contribute some of the cool stuff we’ve
> developed back to Qt. We aren’t quite done
Hi Brett and welcome,
On 30/05/2014 23:14, Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) wrote:
Hi list,
My name is Brett Stottlemyer. I work for Ford Motor Company, and Ford
has graciously agreed to let us contribute some of the cool stuff
we've developed back to Qt. We aren't quite done with everything yet
Hi list,
My name is Brett Stottlemyer. I work for Ford Motor Company, and Ford has
graciously agreed to let us contribute some of the cool stuff we've developed
back to Qt. We aren't quite done with everything yet (still waiting on the
Corporate CLA), but I will be at Qt Contributors Summit i
> Qbs has by definition more features than cmake because it is a make tool.
I understand Qbs may have greater potential by design, but it has far less
features than CMake today. I refer features as ability to detect various
components, such as CUDA, OpenGL and support many platforms. However I d
Em sex 30 maio 2014, às 14:23:29, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
> Hi All,
>
> I was working on implementing HTTP redirection support in QNAM and friends.
>
> While looking at the test case of QNetworkReply, I found that for some
> testcases we use our own mini-http server while for others we're using
Hi All,
I was working on implementing HTTP redirection support in QNAM and friends.
While looking at the test case of QNetworkReply, I found that for some
testcases we use our own mini-http server while for others we're using
an external webserver from the testbed.
Is there a way to configure th
13 matches
Mail list logo
