On Thursday 26 May 2016 14:00:44 Sean Harmer wrote:
> If anybody else if using 4.8 then they can try this patch.
This cropped up again: http://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-59399
→ https://codereview.qt-project.org/187980
--
Marc Mutz | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG,
Hi Marc,
On Thursday 26 May 2016 08:32:21 Marc Mutz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In QAtomic, we use compare_exchange_strong with a single memory_order
> argument. The failure mode is therefore calculated by libctdc++, the
> relevant code in atomic_base.h has not changed from 4.8.0 to 6.1.0, and
> appears to
Hi,
In QAtomic, we use compare_exchange_strong with a single memory_order
argument. The failure mode is therefore calculated by libctdc++, the relevant
code in atomic_base.h has not changed from 4.8.0 to 6.1.0, and appears to do
the correct thing. It does use signed bitmasking operations with e
Bump, is anybody able to help here please?
Thanks,
Sean
On Friday 20 May 2016 10:13:51 Sean Harmer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Trying to submit a simple patch to Qt 3D we are hitting a weird compilation
> error on Android CI configurations. The change is:
>
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/157592/
Hi,
Trying to submit a simple patch to Qt 3D we are hitting a weird compilation
error on Android CI configurations. The change is:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/157592/
and the compilation errors can be seen in full at:
http://testresults.qt.io/logs/qt/qt3d/489c6abe13e098eb87fa2c0a8639
