On Wednesday 20 May 2015 11:28:26 Knoll Lars wrote:
> >So do we maintain binary compatibility for testlib?
>
> I don’t see a strong use case for staying binary compatible with testlib.
There is one use-case, which is to run regression tests without recompiling
the unit test. All the tests that
on
Cc: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Binary compatibility for qtestlib
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Hausmann Simon
mailto:simon.hausm...@theqtcompany.com>> wrote:
Hi,
Lately development of testlib picked up again and I've been wondering: the api
consists of
On 20/05/15 13:16, "Hausmann Simon"
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>
>Lately development of testlib picked up again and I've been wondering:
>the api consists of a fair amount of macros that call "internal"
>functions. It would be convenient to change the signature
> of those while maintaining source compatibil
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Hausmann Simon <
simon.hausm...@theqtcompany.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lately development of testlib picked up again and I've been wondering:
> the api consists of a fair amount of macros that call "internal" functions.
> It would be convenient to change the signatu
Hi,
Lately development of testlib picked up again and I've been wondering: the api
consists of a fair amount of macros that call "internal" functions. It would be
convenient to change the signature of those while maintaining source
compatibility, however it would naturally break the ABI.
On t
