On 02/20/2012 02:36 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On segunda-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2012 12.40.33, kranthi.kumar-
> kunt...@nokia.com wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ok, due to the fact that features have been freezed for Qt5.0 am proposing
>> this to be an addon module.
>>
>> so am sending a request for
On segunda-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2012 12.40.33, kranthi.kumar-
kunt...@nokia.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ok, due to the fact that features have been freezed for Qt5.0 am proposing
> this to be an addon module.
>
> so am sending a request for a new Playground project
>
> name of the project: alignedtim
evelopment-bounces+kranthi.kumar-kuntala=nokia@qt-project.org] on behalf
of ext Thiago Macieira [thiago.macie...@intel.com]
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 2:23 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] QSystemAlignedTimer to QtCore
On sexta-feira, 17 de fevereiro de 201
On sexta-feira, 17 de fevereiro de 2012 14.09.05, Kumar-Kuntala Kranthi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In continuation to the discussion we had some time time ago merge former
> mobility systeminfo Api's QSystemAlignedtimer to QTimer.
>
> http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2011-November/000526.htm
Hi,
In continuation to the discussion we had some time time ago merge former
mobility systeminfo Api's QSystemAlignedtimer to QTimer.
http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2011-November/000526.html
I would like to keep QSystemAlignedtimer as a separate class and not to
merge in QTi
> I can email you more details if needed.
>
More food for thought
http://harmattan-dev.nokia.com/docs/library/html/qmsystem2/classMeeGo_1_1QmHeartbeat.html
Although not very QTimer like, which is why it was decided to not follow this
timer too closely for QtMobility
Lorn Potter
Senior So
On Tuesday, 22 de November de 2011 10.05.49, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
> Agree, but it shouldn't be difficult to do a generic backend based on the
> system clock. So if you want to wakeup every 5 minutes, we'll always do
> that at a defined clock time for all apps. We could simply say when the
>
On 11/21/11 11:39 PM, "ext lorn.pot...@nokia.com"
wrote:
>
>On 21/11/2011, at 9:51 PM, ext shane.kea...@accenture.com wrote:
>
>> It should be used to extend the QTimer API.
>> Where the system doesn't support this kind of timer, then the in
>>process solution as in Thiago's blog should be used.
On 21/11/2011, at 9:51 PM, ext shane.kea...@accenture.com wrote:
> It should be used to extend the QTimer API.
> Where the system doesn't support this kind of timer, then the in process
> solution as in Thiago's blog should be used.
>
> Should there be a preferred interval?
> For some use cases
It should be used to extend the QTimer API.
Where the system doesn't support this kind of timer, then the in process
solution as in Thiago's blog should be used.
Should there be a preferred interval?
For some use cases, the timer is allowed to be late but not early (e.g.
supervisory timeouts) in
10 matches
Mail list logo
