On 7 July 2014 15:10, Koehne Kai wrote:
>> 2) In Qt Creator, the Qt version and kit are still listed as "Qt 5.3.0", even
>> though it has been upgraded to Qt 5.3.1. Since it is an auto-detected entry,
>> the user cannot change the name.
>
> Yeah, that's something we should fix in the next Qt Creat
On Jul 16, 2014, at 5:04 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2014 15:01:53 Ziller Eike wrote:
>> No idea what happens in animations, but I’d suppose that any conversions
>> there would be accidentally.
>
> QPropertyAnimation is based on modifying QVariants, isn't it?
True, but I’
On Jul 16, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Sze Howe Koh wrote:
> On 7 July 2014 19:11, Frederik Gladhorn wrote:
>> Mandag 7. juli 2014 10.02.55 skrev Ziller Eike:
>>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Frederik Gladhorn
>> wrote:
Mandag 7. juli 2014 07.10.00 skrev Koehne Kai:
>
>> No. When running an in
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 15:01:53 Ziller Eike wrote:
> No idea what happens in animations, but I’d suppose that any conversions
> there would be accidentally.
QPropertyAnimation is based on modifying QVariants, isn't it?
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect -
On Jul 16, 2014, at 1:30 PM, Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
>> I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want automatic
>> conversions when using QVariant. A search for QVariant(Map) returns 5400
>> hits. In the map case, we us
On 7 July 2014 19:11, Frederik Gladhorn wrote:
> Mandag 7. juli 2014 10.02.55 skrev Ziller Eike:
>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Frederik Gladhorn
> wrote:
>> > Mandag 7. juli 2014 07.10.00 skrev Koehne Kai:
>> >>> No. When running an installer (online or offline), Qt Creator is a
>> >>> compuls
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for all your contributions over the years. Up to anything
interesting next?
On 16 July 2014 14:25, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> After 5 years, my time at KDAB is coming to an end, and I'm going to have less
> time for Qt development. I'll still be available for reviews.
>
On 7 July 2014 16:09, Ziller Eike wrote:
>
> On Jul 6, 2014, at 3:52 AM, Sze Howe Koh wrote:
>
>> 2) In Qt Creator, the Qt version and kit are still listed as "Qt
>> 5.3.0", even though it has been upgraded to Qt 5.3.1. Since it is an
>> auto-detected entry, the user cannot change the name.
>
> H
On 7 July 2014 15:10, Koehne Kai wrote:
>> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
>> [...]
>> 1) Developers who face regressions (not just testers) are now in an awkward
>> position, and need to install an extra copy of Qt Creator (see
>> below)
>
> Right, that's the main dr
Hi,
After 5 years, my time at KDAB is coming to an end, and I'm going to have less
time for Qt development. I'll still be available for reviews.
I'll be staying in Berlin, so you may still see me around sometimes.
Thanks,
--
Join us at Qt Developer Days 2014 in Berlin! - https://devdays.kdab
Hi
In the qml designer we are using comparisons of variants quite extensive and
run in smaller problems like wrong conversions. E.g. color is broken because
the alpha value is not used in the comparison. We would like to extent existing
comparisons too because we get the variants from different
Definitely a +1 from me as well :)
From: development-bounces+michael.bruning=digia@qt-project.org
[development-bounces+michael.bruning=digia@qt-project.org] on behalf of
Albisser Zeno [zeno.albis...@digia.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:49
T
Hi,
As I have not received any objection to the plan we will now conclude and
proceed with the proposed changes.
Qt WebEngine will become an official Qt add-on module. :-)
Cheers,
- Zeno
From: Zeno Albisser mailto:zeno.albis...@digia.com>>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:55:37 +0200
To: mailto:deve
> Anyway. To summarize my position in the original context: QVariant
> is as it is. It is convenient at times, and it is already too convenient
> at times. "Easy type conversion" is a different use case than "Type
> agnostic storage". QVariant does a bit of both, only the second one
> has ever bee
Olivier Goffart wrote:
> Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> [...]
> > > What is wrong with string -> int or bytearray -> int?
> >
> > At the very least, _implicit_ conversions should not lose data,
> > i.e. a A a1; B b = a1; A a2 = b; round trip ideally should yield
> > a1 == a2.
> >
> > If I am ready to g
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
> I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want automatic
> conversions when using QVariant. A search for QVariant(Map) returns 5400
> hits. In the map case, we usually expect the one retrieving the value for a
> key to kno
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 12:51:36 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:06:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
> > Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> > > Eike wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > >>> We use common sense on a case by case basic.
> > > >
> > > > Either there is no “common sense” common
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:06:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
> Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> > Eike wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > >>> We use common sense on a case by case basic.
> > >
> > > Either there is no “common sense” common to me, or this rule has failed
> > > in
> > > the past already ;)
> > > bool
On Jul 16, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Konrad Rosenbaum wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
>> Olivier Goffart wrote:
>>> It's always a dilemma. We have to look at how likely we are to break
>>> applications and I don't think adding a conversion is likely to cause
>>> breakag
On Jul 16, 2014, at 11:28 AM, Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
>> [...]
>>> When one use QVariant, it is because we want to enjoy dynamic typing and
>>> nice conversions.
>>
>>
>> I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> Eike wrote:
> > [...]
> >>> We use common sense on a case by case basic.
> >
> > Either there is no “common sense” common to me, or this rule has failed in
> > the past already ;)
> > bool -> string ?
> > bytearray -> int/long/double ?
> > keysequence -> int ?
> > string ->
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
> Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > It's always a dilemma. We have to look at how likely we are to break
> > applications and I don't think adding a conversion is likely to cause
> > breakages.
>
> Type safety is a safety net that catches errors ver
Olivier Goffart:
> Poenitz Andre wrote:
> > I wholeheartedly disagree. Most of my QVariant uses are there because
> > the Qt API requires me to use it, and I sometimes use it voluntarily for
> > type-agnostic storage or transport of "things". But in those cases I never
> > want to extract anything
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
> Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > > > I'd say yes, for sensible conversion
> > > > You are right that it is a behaviour change, but i think it is worth
> > > > changing it.
> > >
> > > Why?
> > >
> > > On one hand you promise binary compatibil
+1
On 7/15/14, 10:08 PM, "Gladhorn Frederik"
wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>it¹s my pleasure to nominate Milian Wolff as approver. He¹s a great guy,
>works for KDAB and has done interesting work on profiling, improves
>KDevelop amongst other things and has been active with all things web it
>seems.
>He¹s s
On Wednesday 16 of July 2014 06:37:25 Ziller Eike wrote:
> [...]
> > When one use QVariant, it is because we want to enjoy dynamic typing and
> > nice conversions.
>
>
> I don’t think we have a single place in Qt Creator where we want automatic
> conversions when using QVariant. A search for QV
On Wednesday 16 July 2014 08:41:07 Poenitz Andre wrote:
> I wholeheartedly disagree. Most of my QVariant uses are there because
> the Qt API requires me to use it, and I sometimes use it voluntarily for
> type-agnostic storage or transport of "things". But in those cases I never
> want to extract a
Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > > I'd say yes, for sensible conversion
> > > You are right that it is a behaviour change, but i think it is worth
> > > changing it.
> > Why?
> >
> > On one hand you promise binary compatibility. On the other hand
> > behaviour changes are proposed to be done on an "nice
On Tuesday 15 of July 2014 10:38:52 Poenitz Andre wrote:
> Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> > > 1. Are we allowed to add new conversions?
> > >
> > > The question is tricky because adding a new conversion is a
> > > behavior
> > > change, as this code:
> > >
On Tuesday 15 of July 2014 11:59:03 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > 1.3 Should we try to support a user's type conversions out of the
> >box?
> > Currently a user needs to manually register a conversion function
> >
> > so Qt can know it and use it. For certain types we can do much better
+1
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 08:08:39PM +, Gladhorn Frederik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> it’s my pleasure to nominate Milian Wolff as approver. He’s a great guy,
> works for KDAB and has done interesting work on profiling, improves KDevelop
> amongst other things and has been active with all things
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:51:15AM +0200, Richard Höhne wrote:
> The problem is, that the other files are shown under the subfolder
> lib.pri and not under the header- and cpp-files.
> Is there a possibility to change it[?]
>
no.
wildcard matching in project files is considered bad practice and n
32 matches
Mail list logo
