I understand. Thank you for participating.
On Friday, October 23, 2015 1:19 AM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
On Thursday 22 October 2015 18:50:22 Dimitar Dobrev wrote:
> I don't use GetProcAddress but that's beside the point.
Actually, that is entirely the point.
10:33 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
Em ter 29 abr 2014, às 08:06:37, Thiago Macieira escreveu:
> Em ter 29 abr 2014, às 04:45:37, Dimitar Dobrev escreveu:
> > Allan, I'm not talking about a custom build at all. This whole discussion
> > I
> > started is about how to avoi
urned out more time consuming than I
had thought and that's why I've been searching for a tool to generate those
functions.
Dimitar
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 8:42 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
Em ter 29 abr 2014, às 09:10:39, Dimitar Dobrev escreveu:
> Sharing with other bindi
able to find any.
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 6:55 PM, Milian Wolff wrote:
On Monday 28 April 2014 05:37:40 Dimitar Dobrev wrote:
> My problem (and, I'd say, any binding developer's) is
> that I can't tell users "my binding is great, you just need to compile Qt
&
I understand. Thank you all for your time. Kai, I think you can close the issue
as "Won't Fix".
Regards,
Dimitar Dobrev
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 6:24 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
Em ter 29 abr 2014, às 04:45:37, Dimitar Dobrev escreveu:
> Allan, I'm not talking abou
Tuesday 29 April 2014, Dimitar Dobrev wrote:
> They are not emitted. I've opened QtCore with
> http://www.dependencywalker.com/ and the only symbols I can see for
> QModelIndex are:
>
> _ZNK11QModelIndex4dataEi
> _ZNK11QModelIndex5childEii
> _ZNK11QModelIndex5
Tuesday 29 April 2014, Dimitar Dobrev wrote:
> I don't need invisible inlines either but some of them - such as
> QModelIndex::row() - are visible. Is there any way to emit just the
> visible inlines?
>
Shouldn't be needed they are emitted by default. Only static inl
ould get
my symbols and there won't be uncallable functions in the binaries.
Dimitar
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 1:03 PM, Simon Hausmann
wrote:
On Tuesday 29. April 2014 01.30.24 Dimitar Dobrev wrote:
> I don't need invisible inlines either but some of them - such as
> QModelI
I don't need invisible inlines either but some of them - such as
QModelIndex::row() - are visible. Is there any way to emit just the visible
inlines?
Dimitar
On Monday, April 28, 2014 4:12 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
Em seg 28 abr 2014, às 11:15:23, Koehne Kai escreveu:
> > -Ori
I think it depends on whether you see bindings as a single case or as multiple
cases (one per binding). About other, let's say, types of projects - I am not
aware.
About an option - do you mean an option in the, say, online installer? If it's
a compile option, I'm afraid you might as well not b
Unfortunately, I don't. Perhaps you need to add the flag to QMAKE_CFLAGS as
well?
Dimitar
On Monday, April 28, 2014 2:15 PM, Koehne Kai wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Qt binaries with inlined functio
ake sense
to build with those flags by default with gcc for consistency. I wonder what
the overhead in size is.
Either way I think this should not be specific to qt-project.org binaries.
Simon
Fra: Dimitar Dobrev
Sendt: 10:44 lørdag 26. april 2014
Til: development@qt-project.org
Svar til: Dim
Hello all,
I'd like to start a discussion about
.https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-32995.Please share your
thoughts.
Regards,
Dimitar Dobrev___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-proj
13 matches
Mail list logo
