On Saturday 22 July 2017 18:51:28 Phil Bouchard wrote:
> You're probably making a living off memory leaks so it's obvious you get
> offended but I don't think being a counterproductive manager is good for
> the Qt company. In fact it's the first time ever I hear about a manager
> complaining abo
You're probably making a living off memory leaks so it's obvious you get
offended but I don't think being a counterproductive manager is good for
the Qt company. In fact it's the first time ever I hear about a manager
complaining about new technologies that is better and... free.
On 07/22/201
Regardless, he has a point: in more diplomatic terms, this thread and those
preceding it are not promoting useful discourse, so I'd encourage others to
refrain from posting further replies, and let this thread die out.
Sent from my iPhone - the most secure mobile device - via the Verizon network
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Saturday, 22 July 2017 09:22:38 PDT Phil Bouchard wrote:
>> - Replace all pointer or gc types with the 'auto' keyword in the QML parser
>> - Use standard 'operator new'
>
> You have no idea how difficult this may be. It just looks easy because you
> haven't tried.
>
Oleg Khotskin wrote:
> Does anyone take this dumbass seriously?
>
I bet you have a better solution
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
That's the sort of comment that drives new people away from open source
projects. Please refrain from making such comments.
Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Rogers Network
From: o.khots...@gmail.com
Sent: July 22, 2017 2:06 PM
To: philipp...@gmail.com
Cc: developm
Does anyone take this dumbass seriously?
--
Best regards,
Oleg
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
On Saturday, 22 July 2017 09:22:38 PDT Phil Bouchard wrote:
> - Replace all pointer or gc types with the 'auto' keyword in the QML parser
> - Use standard 'operator new'
You have no idea how difficult this may be. It just looks easy because you
haven't tried.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieir
Vlad Stelmahovsky wrote:
> over C++ ??
No it's much faster than the Javascript -> JIT flow.
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Phil Bouchard wrote:
>
>> On 07/22/2017 05:52 AM, Vlad Stelmahovsky wrote:
>>
>>> Phil,
>>> Can you please explain benefits of having C++ -> WebAssembly ?
>>>
>>
>>
over C++ ??
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 5:43 PM, Phil Bouchard wrote:
> On 07/22/2017 05:52 AM, Vlad Stelmahovsky wrote:
>
>> Phil,
>> Can you please explain benefits of having C++ -> WebAssembly ?
>>
>
> Assembling speed (about 20% faster) and execution speed (about 3.5x
> faster):
> http://webasse
On 07/22/2017 12:01 PM, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
On 21 July 2017 at 17:48, Phil Bouchard wrote:
For a web engine I don't think it's possible to swap the Javascript engine
entirely but it is possible to introduce the BB++ -> C++ -> WebAssembly
sequence.
For the QML / Javascript dual then it cou
On 21 July 2017 at 17:48, Phil Bouchard wrote:
> For a web engine I don't think it's possible to swap the Javascript engine
> entirely but it is possible to introduce the BB++ -> C++ -> WebAssembly
> sequence.
>
> For the QML / Javascript dual then it could be replaced by with the QML /
> BB++ dua
On 07/22/2017 05:52 AM, Vlad Stelmahovsky wrote:
Phil,
Can you please explain benefits of having C++ -> WebAssembly ?
Assembling speed (about 20% faster) and execution speed (about 3.5x faster):
http://webassembly.org/docs/faq/
Regards,
-Phil
___
D
Phil,
Can you please explain benefits of having C++ -> WebAssembly ?
thanks
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Phil Bouchard wrote:
> On 07/21/2017 02:10 AM, Lorn Potter wrote:
>
>>
>> On 21 Jul 2017, at 2:22 pm, Phil Bouchard wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> So I would like to know if Qt thinks what I am pro
14 matches
Mail list logo