On Aug 21, 2012, at 10:36 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Hello
>
> I've just done some benchmarking of QMutex on Linux, using the pthread
> implementation instead of the futex one.
>
> Conclusions first:
>
> QMutex is optimised for uncontended case. It does that by keeping the d
> pointer
On Aug 14, 2012, at 10:27 AM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On terça-feira, 14 de agosto de 2012 07.36.31, song.7@nokia.com wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When the thread is exiting the destroy_current_thread_data will be called,
>> and only if the thread data is adopted, the QThreadPrivate::finish is
>
On Jun 21, 2012, at 4:38 PM, ext David Faure wrote:
> KDE4 (KDialog) has a nice feature that makes the application name appear in
> the window title bar.
>
> I think it's very nice to know which application a window comes from.
> Especially for the worst case: error message boxes :)
>
> QDial
On 19 Jun, 2012, at 10:07 , ext Peter Kümmel wrote:
> BTW, are there any plans to use lock-free techniques somewhere within Qt?
http://qt.gitorious.org/qt/qtbase/blobs/master/src/corelib/tools/qfreelist_p.h
http://qt.gitorious.org/qt/qtbase/blobs/master/src/corelib/tools/qfreelist.cpp
;)
> Or
On Jun 12, 2012, at 11:12 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On terça-feira, 12 de junho de 2012 15.16.38, Stephen Chu wrote:
>> I am curious if the runtime issue on OS X has been dealt with?
>
> Yes. We decided not to force libc++. We're still using the compiler default,
> whichever that is (cu
On May 22, 2012, at 11:01 AM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> And I don't think they very much liked the idea of spinning while trying to
> acquire a lock (consumes power)... at least we have a call to
> QThread::yieldCurrentThread(), though it would be interesting to see what
> happens if we repl
On May 21, 2012, at 2:58 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On segunda-feira, 21 de maio de 2012 08.34.32, bradley.hug...@nokia.com wrote:
>> On May 18, 2012, at 8:34 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>> Recommendations (priority):
>>>
>>> (P0) de-inline QBasicMutex locking functions until we solve
On May 18, 2012, at 8:34 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Recommendations (priority):
>
> (P0) de-inline QBasicMutex locking functions until we solve some or all of
> the
> below problems
I agree with this, so that it gives a chance to fix the performance regressions
on Mac at a later date (
On 30 Apr, 2012, at 22:13 , ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>> Still, I meant my own task: since these are API-level considerations, I
>>> was and still am under the impression that they are needed by beta time.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by this.
>
> This is what answers the "now" part. The c
On 30 Apr, 2012, at 21:07 , ext bradley.hug...@nokia.com wrote:
> No, I'm not rebuilding just the platform plugin(s), this has to do with all
> of qtbase (mostly). I will double check this though, since things are
> constantly changing everyday. The situation may have improved (but that
> doesn'
On Apr 30, 2012, at 8:50 PM, ext Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Monday 30 April 2012 17:57:46 bradley.hug...@nokia.com wrote:
>> On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:19 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>> On segunda-feira, 30 de abril de 2012 16.58.08, bradley.hug...@nokia.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
Seriously? What a
On Apr 30, 2012, at 8:43 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On segunda-feira, 30 de abril de 2012 17.57.46, bradley.hug...@nokia.com
> wrote:
>> When faced with two options, 1) fix deprecated warnings or 2) continue work
>> to restore Qt 4 behavior in the platform plugins, I'm going to say we
>> s
On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:19 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On segunda-feira, 30 de abril de 2012 16.58.08, bradley.hug...@nokia.com
> wrote:
>> Seriously? What about my comment (plea) to revert the change that enabled
>> these warnings? As I mentioned before (and others in my team), these
>> warn
On Apr 30, 2012, at 4:07 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 27 de abril de 2012 23.02.58, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> Just a notice to all devs:
>>
>> Since 0df1c9f1fa04c06d6105de3f312c6c752a58ad70 integrated on Wednesday, all
>> Qt modules have deprecation warnings enabled now. That
On Apr 11, 2012, at 1:20 AM, ext Christoph Feck wrote:
> Instead of rushing half-baked APIs, the 5.0 release should be a solid
> base from which new and well designed APIs can be launched. The less
> APIs are included into 5.0, the lower the frustation will be when it
> is later discovered that
On Mar 29, 2012, at 2:18 PM, ext marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com wrote:
> Eh, after alpha please?
That will happen already (it's in the api_changes branch).
--
Bradley T. Hughes
bradley.hug...@nokia.com
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project
On 09 Feb, 2012, at 03:58 , ext marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com wrote:
> Jira changes recommendations
[snip]
> Transfer ownership of issues
> Early on there was a suggestion that a Module attribute was created to map
> directly to maintainers. Later discussions implied that this is not necessary
Yesterday was a bit of a frustrating day. I had to stage a simple .pro-file
change of mine 8, eight, times before it finally went in. All of the breakages
throughout the day where build breakages. Many of them were in the autotests,
but some where in the libraries themselves.
My request is simp
On 14 Dec, 2011, at 09:46 , ext Denis wrote:
[snip]
> Tell me, what it is: OS Windows feature or bug notifier?
This is a Windows "feature" you could say. You will see this behavior whenever
Windows runs a local event loop: moving or resizing a window with the mouse,
opening the application menu,
+2 :P
On 24 Nov, 2011, at 12:23 , ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> An idea to consider.
>
> I don't think *anyone* uses QSound these days.
>
> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
> Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
> Intel Sweden AB - Registration Numb
Hi,
Lately I've been working on trying to get the qt5/qtbase autotests and
benchmarks working again on Mac OS X. It's pretty slow going, mostly because I
cannot do it all at once. I've already put in several changes to get the
autotests to at least build on Mac OS X. At the moment, I'm waiting
On 10 Nov, 2011, at 00:41 , ext Rick Stockton wrote:
> Should we do them all as one update, or do xlib first -- and add the more
> widely used xcb as a separate update, after the first one is found NOT to
> cause regression test failures over the next weekend? (BTW, I don't know how
> to do the
On 02 Nov, 2011, at 01:29 , ext Rohan McGovern wrote:
> Thiago Macieira said:
>> On Tuesday, 1 de November de 2011 10:55:49 Frans Klaver wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
One more thing: QT_DEPRECATED expands to empty during the Qt build.
Should w
23 matches
Mail list logo
