Re: [Development] Heads up for Qt Bug Report & Code Review users

On 22/12/15 16:22, "Giuseppe D'Angelo" wrote: >On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Jokiniva Jukka > wrote: >> Qt Account won¹t be created automatically. If you don¹t have one, you >>need >> to register at https://login.qt.io/register > >Ok, but what happens if I don't do that before the deadline?

Re: [Development] wec2013 build fails with qt 5.6 beta in dbus.

Sorry but 1. -no-dbus is sufficient for me. 2. i am on leave now and will return to work not before Epiphany . Regards, Gunnar > Am 22.12.2015 um 18:07 schrieb Bornemann Joerg > : > > On Monday 21 December 2015 21:58:46 Gunnar Roth wrote: >

[Development] Solution for Build errors in Qt Commercial Charts module 2.1 in qt 5.6 beta

moc tells me Error: Undefined interface and he is right.   Charts\2.1\Src\charts\axis\polarchartaxis_p.h Charts\2.1\Src\charts\axis\cartesianchartaxis_p.h need #include   Charts\2.1\Src\charts\linechart\linechartitem_p.h Charts\2.1\Src\charts\splinechart\splinechartitem_p.h need #include

Re: [Development] wec2013 build fails with qt 5.6 beta in dbus.

On Monday 21 December 2015 21:58:46 Gunnar Roth wrote: > It's an unfortunate side effect of the configure.exe changes that enable > QtDBus > on all platforms. The code does work on Windows CE, but you have to figure out > why windows.h got included when it shouldn't have or tell it to stop > #def

Re: [Development] wec2013 build fails with qt 5.6 beta in dbus.

On Tuesday 22 December 2015 15:07:51 Gunnar Roth wrote: > You tested the code on wince with which dbus component? No. It's untested. The QtDBus parts of the code should have no problem, since they are cross-platform. It's libdbus-1 that needs testing and that's out-of- scope for me. (KDAB did a l

[Development] foreach (was: RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?)

On 2015-12-22 11:08, Marc Mutz wrote: > Try to port all your Q_FOREACH to range-for loops. You will be surprised how > much digging is required if you don't always want to take the hit of taking a > copy. Okay, thanks for the info. (One reason I ask is because qtExtensions¹ actually replaces 'fo

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On Tuesday 22 December 2015 15:40:01 Matthew Woehlke wrote: > On 2015-12-22 09:50, Marc Mutz wrote: > > foreach(const QString &s : someLongExpression()->fooBar().names()) > > > > const auto strings = someLongExpression()->fooBar().names(); > > for (const QString &s : strings) > >

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On 2015-12-22 09:50, Marc Mutz wrote: > foreach(const QString &s : someLongExpression()->fooBar().names()) > > const auto strings = someLongExpression()->fooBar().names(); > for (const QString &s : strings) On that note, is there any case in which Q_FOREACH is superior to a range-base

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On 2015-12-22 05:26, Ziller Eike wrote: > So, directly after the above example in Item 5, Item 6 in Effective > Modern C++ continues with the examples of how you can shoot yourself > in the foot _because_ you used auto. [...] > > We have something similar in Qt: > > QString a = "ABC"; > Q

Re: [Development] Heads up for Qt Bug Report & Code Review users

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Jokiniva Jukka wrote: > Qt Account won¹t be created automatically. If you don¹t have one, you need > to register at https://login.qt.io/register Ok, but what happens if I don't do that before the deadline? Will my account go into a black hole? Can't a matching Qt

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

I am now using this qt_functions.prf and that works fine. Regards, Gunnar   Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Dezember 2015 um 15:05 Uhr Von: "Adam Light" An: Kein Empfänger Cc: "development@qt-project.org" Betreff: Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt

Re: [Development] wec2013 build fails with qt 5.6 beta in dbus.

You tested the code on wince with which dbus component?   windows.h probaly got included by the special qt wince headers.   I wonder why there is a CI for wec2012, which did not catch that problem.    Regards, Gunnar Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Dezember 2015 um 15:01 Uhr Von: "Thiago Macieir

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On Tuesday, 22 December 2015 15:06:34 WET Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > 22.12.2015, 14:50, "Bubke Marco" : > > Clazy is nice but it's under GPL so it's not possible to integrate it in > > the creator clang code model. But I think we need something like clazy > > for the clang code model too. > I see

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 1:43 AM, Gunnar Roth wrote: > Hello, > > when i used jom i get this dialog with qt5core not found. > When using nmake i get this error: > > For what it's worth, I created a bug report about this about a week ago at https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-49985. Adam ___

Re: [Development] wec2013 build fails with qt 5.6 beta in dbus.

On Monday 21 December 2015 21:58:46 Gunnar Roth wrote: > How am I supposed know? It worked without that since 5.2.1. How should > anybody know that now -no-dbus is needed. It's an unfortunate side effect of the configure.exe changes that enable QtDBus on all platforms. The code does work on Wind

Re: [Development] wec2013 build fails with qt 5.6 beta in dbus.

On Monday 21 December 2015 23:43:15 Gunnar Roth wrote: > Hi Simon. > The conflict happens in a dozen files in qtbase/src/dbus/ and > qttools/src/qdbus. I can add the #undef to qdbusmessage.h. It has a function called interface(). -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Arc

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On Tuesday 22 December 2015 13:42:06 Ziller Eike wrote: > > On Dec 22, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Marc Mutz wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 22 December 2015 11:26:40 Ziller Eike wrote: > >> We have something similar in Qt: > >>QString a = "ABC"; > >>QString b = "abc"; > >>auto result = a + b; > >>

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

22.12.2015, 15:48, "Bubke Marco" : > I think in the end we will look if it is easier to implement something > similar. It's a tradeoff. > > On December 22, 2015 13:06:42 Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > >>  22.12.2015, 14:50, "Bubke Marco" : >>>  Clazy is nice but it's under GPL so it's not possible

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

I think in the end we will look if it is easier to implement something similar. It's a tradeoff. On December 22, 2015 13:06:42 Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > 22.12.2015, 14:50, "Bubke Marco" : >> Clazy is nice but it's under GPL so it's not possible to integrate it in the >> creator clang code

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

> On Dec 22, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Marc Mutz wrote: > > On Tuesday 22 December 2015 11:26:40 Ziller Eike wrote: >> We have something similar in Qt: >> >>QString a = "ABC"; >>QString b = "abc"; >>auto result = a + b; >>a.replace("A", "C"); >>qDebug() << result; >> >> prints “CBC

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

I found this change: --- a/qtbase/mkspecs/features/qt_functions.prf +++ a/qtbase/mkspecs/features/qt_functions.prf   # variable, default, [suffix for variable for system() use], [prepare primary variable for system() use]  defineTest(qtPrepareTool) {      cmd = $$eval(QT_TOOL.$${2}.binary) @@ -

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

22.12.2015, 14:50, "Bubke Marco" : > Clazy is nice but it's under GPL so it's not possible to integrate it in the > creator clang code model. But I think we need something like clazy for the > clang code model too. I see at least 2 options how to integrate clazy: 1. Include it as a separate G

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

> The thing is that in Qt 5.5.1, uic.exe and qlalr.exe were also build > using qtcore dll, but there this was not a problem. > In wec build they are always build statically, i think that should be > made uniform. > > Now that I look closer i see the cause of the problem: > set PATH=D:\TFS\bld__G

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

Clazy is nice but it's under GPL so it's not possible to integrate it in the creator clang code model. But I think we need something like clazy for the clang code model too. From: Development on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

Hi Tim, no you are not hallucinating , or you at least your are not the only one hallucinating ;-)     The thing is that in Qt 5.5.1, uic.exe and qlalr.exe were also build using qtcore dll, but there this was not a problem. In wec build they are always build statically, i think that should b

Re: [Development] Heads up for Qt Bug Report & Code Review users

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Jokiniva Jukka wrote: > > > On 21/12/15 12:52, "Giuseppe D'Angelo" wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Jokiniva Jukka >> wrote: >>> · If you don¹t already have Qt credentials, all you need to do >>>is >>> register at https://login.qt.io/r

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On Tuesday 22 December 2015 11:26:40 Ziller Eike wrote: > We have something similar in Qt: > > QString a = "ABC"; > QString b = "abc"; > auto result = a + b; > a.replace("A", "C"); > qDebug() << result; > > prints “CBCabc” instead of “ABCabc” when QT_USE_FAST_OPERATOR_PLUS is

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

Il 22/12/2015 11:26, Ziller Eike ha scritto: So funny/unwanted behavior can occur both because one used the wrong explicit type, and because one used auto instead of an explicit type. These shortcomings of auto are recognized in the community, but yes, they're real and dangerous. Clazy [1] al

Re: [Development] Heads up for Qt Bug Report & Code Review users

On 21/12/15 12:52, "Giuseppe D'Angelo" wrote: >Hi, > >On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Jokiniva Jukka > wrote: >> · If you don¹t already have Qt credentials, all you need to do >>is >> register at https://login.qt.io/register* using the same email address >>you >> currently use for Bug

Re: [Development] Heads up for Qt Bug Report & Code Review users

OK, Let¹s reschedule this to 21-Jan-2016. ‹Jukka On 21/12/15 12:01, "Development on behalf of Heikkinen Jani" wrote: >>>-Original Message- >>>From: Development [mailto:development-boun...@qt-project.org] On Behalf >>>Of Sean Harmer >>>Sent: 21. joulukuuta 2015 11:22 >>>To: develo

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

> On Dec 8, 2015, at 10:46 AM, Ziller Eike wrote: > > >> On Dec 7, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Knoll Lars wrote: >> >> On 07/12/15 15:44, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Monday 07 December 2015 13:48:58 Ziller Eike wrote: I do not think that more usage of ‘auto’

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

> I found out that the % is due to using jom in 5.5.1 and nmake in 5.6.1. > I looked into the Makefiles and bot had the same term. When i use jom > for 5.6 i see (set > QT_PLUGIN_PATH=D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\WIN32-VS11-32\qtbase\plugins) > & (set > PATH=D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\WIN32-VS11-32\q

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

I found out that the % is due to using jom in 5.5.1 and nmake in 5.6.1. I looked into the Makefiles and bot had the same term. When i use jom for 5.6 i see (set QT_PLUGIN_PATH=D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\WIN32-VS11-32\qtbase\plugins) & (set PATH=D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\WIN32-VS11-32\qtbase\bin;%%

[Development] Qt 5.6.0 beta. win32 vs11 32 bit fails with uic.exe showing dialog qt5core.dll cannot be found.

Hello,   when i used jom i get this dialog with qt5core not found. When using nmake i get this error:         (set QT_PLUGIN_PATH=D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\WIN32-VS11-32\qtbase\plugins) & (set PATH=D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\WIN32-VS11-32\qtbase\bin;%PATH:)=^)% ) & D:\TFS\bld__GLOBAL\Qt5.6.0\W