Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans (CopperSpice)

2015-06-29 Thread Alejandro Exojo
El Tuesday 30 June 2015, Ansel Sermersheim escribió: > Our September release of CopperSpice will include changes to the > contain library, reimplementation of atomic types, our new changes to > the MetaObject System registration, full API documentation, ?? > > We would like to encourage developers

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans (CopperSpice)

2015-06-29 Thread Ansel Sermersheim
On 6/29/15 10:59 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Monday 29 June 2015 22:51:25 Ansel Sermersheim wrote: >> I would like to clarify, we did not use anything from the Woboq >> blog posting as others have speculated. We had moc removed from >> CopperSpice a year earlier than the release of this blog. W

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans (CopperSpice)

2015-06-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Monday 29 June 2015 22:51:25 Ansel Sermersheim wrote: > I would like to clarify, we did not use anything from the Woboq blog > posting as others have speculated. We had moc removed from CopperSpice > a year earlier than the release of this blog. We are also not > associated with the Trinity Proj

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans (CopperSpice)

2015-06-29 Thread Ansel Sermersheim
> There is always CopperSpice the Qt fork which uses C++11. They've > got rid of moc and plan to replace Qt containers with std ones. > Afterwards maybe they will add support for namespaces to their > peppermill source convertor utility. I am one of the developers of CopperSpice and I would like

Re: [Development] Disabling thread safe static guards

2015-06-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Monday 29 June 2015 13:02:42 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > Since MSVC doesn't support it we can't rely on this feature in > > cross-platform Qt code (maybe only in QPA code). > > Correct. Also, it's one of the C++11 features. It's tracked as Q_COMPILER_THREADSAFE_STATICS and is supported in MSVC

Re: [Development] Disabling thread safe static guards

2015-06-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Monday 29 June 2015 19:44:49 Sergio Martins wrote: > Hi, > > > Can we disable gcc's feature of emitting extra code to make local static > initialization thread safe ? (-fno-threadsafe-statics) No. > Since MSVC doesn't support it we can't rely on this feature in > cross-platform Qt code (mayb

[Development] Disabling thread safe static guards

2015-06-29 Thread Sergio Martins
Hi, Can we disable gcc's feature of emitting extra code to make local static initialization thread safe ? (-fno-threadsafe-statics) Since MSVC doesn't support it we can't rely on this feature in cross-platform Qt code (maybe only in QPA code). Generates uneeded code and helps hidding crashes

Re: [Development] FileRe: Move ctors for q_declare_shared types

2015-06-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Monday 29 June 2015 20:42:40 Marc Mutz wrote: > > But, isn't there a third way for some types? For those that can take a > > null > > > > d- pointer, it should be easy to just do: > > > > > > Klass &operator=(Klass &&other) > > { d = other.d; other.d = nullptr; return *this; } > >

Re: [Development] FileRe: Move ctors for q_declare_shared types

2015-06-29 Thread Marc Mutz
On Monday 29 June 2015 17:50:31 Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Monday 29 June 2015 17:14:57 Marc Mutz wrote: > > So, it doubles the number of dtor calls, and it pessimises all code > > around it. I am not prepared to make that pessimisation for out-of-line > > types. People who use std::move can imo

Re: [Development] FileRe: Move ctors for q_declare_shared types

2015-06-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Monday 29 June 2015 17:14:57 Marc Mutz wrote: > So, it doubles the number of dtor calls, and it pessimises all code around > it. I am not prepared to make that pessimisation for out-of-line types. > People who use std::move can imo be bothered to clear the moved-from object > after the move in

Re: [Development] FileRe: Move ctors for q_declare_shared types

2015-06-29 Thread Marc Mutz
On Monday 29 June 2015 13:44:13 Daniel Teske wrote: > Instead I will argue that: > This guarantee is important, valuable and good and Qt not giving this is > bad. > > So, in this example: > > QSharedPointer a = [...] > QSharedPointer b = [...] > a = std::move(b); I repect Howard a lot, and he's

Re: [Development] New Qt 5.5.0 snapshot available - aimed to be final packages

2015-06-29 Thread Helio Chissini de Castro
Hello Can you please generate the splitted set of packages ? []'s On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Salovaara Akseli < akseli.salova...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > > > We have new Qt 5.5.0 packages available which are aimed to be final. > > > > Windows: http://download.qt.io/snapshot

[Development] FileRe: Move ctors for q_declare_shared types

2015-06-29 Thread Daniel Teske
> > > - QVector should give the same guarantee as the standard containers. > > > > I disagree with that. QVector is not std::vector. At first, it is > > implicitly shared, so that's already a big difference. And therefore we > > can allow ourselfs many more differences. > > But this point still

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans

2015-06-29 Thread Francesco Riosa
Il 29/06/2015 02:02, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: SNIP >> In fact, it is already a big problem for us that it is being deprecated at >> all. QtWebEngine is not an adequate replacement, neither for developers >> (insufficient API), nor for packagers (bundling Chromium that itself bundles >> dozens o

[Development] New Qt 5.5.0 snapshot available - aimed to be final packages

2015-06-29 Thread Salovaara Akseli
Hi all, We have new Qt 5.5.0 packages available which are aimed to be final. Windows: http://download.qt.io/snapshots/qt/5.5/5.5.0/2015-06-26_109/ Linux: http://download.qt.io/snapshots/qt/5.5/5.5.0/2015-06-26_136/ Mac: http://download.qt.io/snapshots/qt/5.5/5.5.0/2015-06-26_111/ Source: h