Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

Mathias Hasselmann schreef op 8-2-2015 om 22:28: Am 08.02.2015 um 14:28 schrieb Marc Mutz: c. Using QMap. As Alex Stepanov put it: every use of a map should be discussed in a face-to-face meeting with your manager. Since we don't have that, I'd change this to: Everyone wishing to use

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

Den 08-02-2015 kl. 22:42 skrev André Pönitz: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 10:17:40PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: >> What would be the point of macros if they always expanded? The entire point >> and usefulness of these macros is that they expand to standard keywords when >> those standard keyw

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

Den 08-02-2015 kl. 21:25 skrev Olivier Goffart: > On Sunday 08 February 2015 19:15:18 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: >> Il 08/02/2015 17:58, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: >>> So we come back to this question again and again: if you can't upgrade the >>> OS and upgrade the compiler, why do you want to upgra

Re: [Development] Deprecating BlackBerry Playbook support

No objections from my side. Unless someone else raises a very good argument (I can’t see what that would be) within the next 48 hours, please go ahead. Cheers, Lars On 06/02/15 16:55, "Rafael Roquetto" wrote: >Hello, > >Unless anyone is willing to help, I would like to propose deprecating and >

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

Am 09.02.2015 um 00:07 schrieb Allan Sandfeld Jensen: > I am not a big fan of nullptr, Out of curiosity: What's wrong with nullptr in your opinion? Ciao, Mathias ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailm

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sunday 08 February 2015, André Pönitz wrote: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 10:17:40PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > What would be the point of macros if they always expanded? The entire > > point and usefulness of these macros is that they expand to standard > > keywords when those standar

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 10:17:40PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > What would be the point of macros if they always expanded? The entire point > and usefulness of these macros is that they expand to standard keywords when > those standard keywords exists. What's the point of using a macro

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

Am 08.02.2015 um 14:28 schrieb Marc Mutz: > c. Using QMap. As Alex Stepanov put it: every use of a map should be discussed > in a face-to-face meeting with your manager. Since we don't have that, I'd > change this to: Everyone wishing to use a QMap should implement one before > using

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sunday 08 February 2015, André Pönitz wrote: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 09:08:01PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > > On Sunday 08 February 2015 20:06:14 André Pönitz wrote: > > > > 3. nullptr - On top of the warning, which I wasn't aware about, I > > > > find the > > > > > > > >code easier to read

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

> Am 08.02.2015 um 21:25 schrieb Olivier Goffart : > > On Sunday 08 February 2015 19:15:18 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: >> Il 08/02/2015 17:58, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: >>> So we come back to this question again and again: if you can't upgrade the >>> OS and upgrade the compiler, why do you want t

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 09:08:01PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > On Sunday 08 February 2015 20:06:14 André Pönitz wrote: > > > 3. nullptr - On top of the warning, which I wasn't aware about, I find > > > the > > > > > >code easier to read. It's a mouthful, but it's what everyone will be > > >using

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

On Sunday 08 February 2015 19:15:18 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > Il 08/02/2015 17:58, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: > > So we come back to this question again and again: if you can't upgrade the > > OS and upgrade the compiler, why do you want to upgrade Qt? > > Because people want to use the latest f

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sunday 08 February 2015 20:06:14 André Pönitz wrote: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 02:28:03PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > > 3. nullptr - On top of the warning, which I wasn't aware about, I find the > > > >code easier to read. It's a mouthful, but it's what everyone will be > >using > >fi

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sunday 08 February 2015 20:06:14 André Pönitz wrote: > > 3. nullptr - On top of the warning, which I wasn't aware about, I find > > the > > > >code easier to read. It's a mouthful, but it's what everyone will be > >using five years from now, so we might as well start it now. > > The origina

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 02:28:03PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > 3. nullptr - On top of the warning, which I wasn't aware about, I find the >code easier to read. It's a mouthful, but it's what everyone will be using >five years from now, so we might as well start it now. The original discussio

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

On Sunday 08 February 2015 19:15:18 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > Il 08/02/2015 17:58, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: > > So we come back to this question again and again: if you can't upgrade the > > OS and upgrade the compiler, why do you want to upgrade Qt? > > Because people want to use the latest f

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

Il 08/02/2015 17:58, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: So we come back to this question again and again: if you can't upgrade the OS and upgrade the compiler, why do you want to upgrade Qt? Because people want to use the latest features / bugfixes for developing their product, and yet they need to t

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

On Sunday 08 February 2015 13:41:59 Dr. Nico Wallmeier wrote: > In the enterprise environment these devices are shipped with a specific > Windows CE / Embedded Compact and stay on this version up to EOL. > Normally it is not possible update these units to newer OS versions > (only patch updates may

Re: [Development] [Solved] Impossible to do review after a logon

Yes. On my side. Now all is works. Need just to remove all trash from the c:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\ and try to re-start of Firefox. BR, Denis 08.02.2015 14:56, Bo Thorsen пишет: > I think the problem is on your side. I don't have any problems with it > on Windows/Chrome. > > Bo.

Re: [Development] Upgrading the sources to C++11 keywords (Q_NULLPTR, etc.)

Hi, Sorry for being late, didn't see the thread before. On Thursday 08 January 2015 23:33:34 Thiago Macieira wrote: > I think it's time to institute a policy that we should fix our sources to > use the new C++11 keywords. I'd like to propose the following. I totally agree, with the following ame

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

>> please keep in mind that in the enterprise environment Windows CE / >> Windows Embedded Compact is still an important platform! > > I understand that, but to which point? > Mac OS X 10.6 was also an important platform used by about 10% of the mac > users. Yet, we decided to drop support for i

Re: [Development] Feature freeze approaching

I'd like to request a revert for 198009db79a85d3cab7fe3a6432635d36123a2d6 , which re-broke the Arabic text shaping (i.e. see QTBUG-35836 , Qt5.2_BAD.png). The alternative fix for the issue fixed by 198009db79 is https://codereview.qt-project.org/102323

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

> ...and you're keeping up to date with all the security patches > to Qt, Chromium, etc.? If not, your "better experience" is leaving > your application's users vulnerable. We have the capability to turn around an update quickly if necessary and try to use system libraries where possible, especial

Re: [Development] Impossible to do review after a logon

I think the problem is on your side. I don't have any problems with it on Windows/Chrome. Bo. Den 08-02-2015 kl. 12:39 skrev Denis Shienkov: > UPD2: This happens on Windows && Firefox 35.0.1 only, though on Linux && > Rekonq this works fine. > > > 2015-02-08 11:32 GMT+00:00 Denis Shienkov

Re: [Development] Impossible to do review after a logon

UPD2: This happens on Windows && Firefox 35.0.1 only, though on Linux && Rekonq this works fine. 2015-02-08 11:32 GMT+00:00 Denis Shienkov : > UPD: Also I can go to my account settings on: > >- https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/settings/ > > also can view a goups: > >- https://coderev

Re: [Development] Impossible to do review after a logon

UPD: Also I can go to my account settings on: * https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/settings/ also can view a goups: * https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/settings/group-memberships but others url's: * https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/settings/preferences * https://codereview.qt-projec

[Development] Impossible to do review after a logon

Hi all, After logon on https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/, and rtying to "enter" on any commit to @expand" it, I got a following error: " Working... Code Review - Error Server Unavailable 0 " But if a try to do same without logon, then I can view content of any patch, to see any comments, and

Re: [Development] Deprecating modules with 5.5

On Thursday 05 February 2015 09:29:02 Dr. Nico Wallmeier wrote: > Hello, > > please keep in mind that in the enterprise environment Windows CE / > Windows Embedded Compact is still an important platform! I understand that, but to which point? Mac OS X 10.6 was also an important platform used by a