On Wednesday 09 July 2014 17:32:29 Calogero Mauceri wrote:
> I did not know the POSIX implementation was not supported.
I think it should be supported and you should be able to choose which
implementation you want at runtime.
Room for contribution :-)
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) i
-bounces+marco.bubke=digia@qt-project.org
[development-bounces+marco.bubke=digia@qt-project.org] on behalf of
Calogero Mauceri [mauc...@actgate.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 5:32 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] QSharedMemory POSIX implementation
On 7/9/2014
On 7/9/2014 5:22 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 July 2014 16:17:38 Calogero Mauceri wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I find QSharedMemory very useful, and I'm extensively using it for cross
>> platform IPC.
>>
>> I noticed in the code (qsharedmemory_unix.cpp) there are two
>> implementations
On Wednesday 09 July 2014 16:17:38 Calogero Mauceri wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I find QSharedMemory very useful, and I'm extensively using it for cross
> platform IPC.
>
> I noticed in the code (qsharedmemory_unix.cpp) there are two
> implementations for that class, one using System V IPC and the other
Hi all,
I find QSharedMemory very useful, and I'm extensively using it for cross
platform IPC.
I noticed in the code (qsharedmemory_unix.cpp) there are two
implementations for that class, one using System V IPC and the other
using POSIX IPC (mmap). On both Linux and Mac versions of Qt, the Sys
