Re: [Development] QString::fromAscii & toAscii's future

2012-04-24 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: Robin Burchell > 2012/4/24 Thiago Macieira : >> My recommendation is a variant of options 3: we document that it accepts > only >> US-ASCII and that it has undefined behaviour when the input isn't > US-ASCII >> compliant. That way, we can make it be equal

Re: [Development] QString::fromAscii & toAscii's future

2012-04-24 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira > Subject: Re: [Development] QString::fromAscii & toAscii's future > On terça-feira, 24 de abril de 2012 07.33.41, BRM wrote: >> Question: is there are reason not to support the US-Extended ASCII >> (128-255)? I know it's not used of

Re: [Development] Dynamic QtServiceFramework backend.

2012-05-02 Thread BRM
> From: "jan-arve.saet...@nokia.com" >ext Corentin Jabot wrote on 2012-05-02: > >> >> bool >> QServiceManager::setInterProcessMethod(QService::InterProcessMethod); >> >> enum QService::InterProcessMethod { >>            Native, >>            LocalSocket, >>            DBus >> } >> >Wouldn't >

Re: [Development] The place of QML

2012-05-11 Thread BRM
> From: d3fault > So, I'm supposed to want to contribute an upgraded C++ GUI API ("Yes, > the Qt Widgets module we have in Qt 5 is right now marked as ‘done’, > which means we don’t have anybody actively working on new features for > the module at this point in time. But this can change any day i

Re: [Development] The place of QML

2012-05-15 Thread BRM
> From: Donald Carr > Please provide a link to your poll when citing it so that people can > look at empirical data: > > http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/16693/ > > must be the wrong poll, since that shows QML components being a > primary point of concern. This is out of a sample set of

Re: [Development] The place of QML

2012-05-16 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira >On quarta-feira, 16 de maio de 2012 16.56.05, Robin Burchell wrote: >> That isn't how reality works. You cannot tell me (as a volunteer) what >> I ought to be spending my time on any more than I can tell you what >> color to paint your livingroom. My interests dictate wha

Re: [Development] Code of conduct.

2012-06-21 Thread BRM
I have not yet become a contributor (hope to in the future once I can find time), but I 100% agree. At the very least, it will give something to point to when it comes to working with forum and list administrators when the rare occurrence requires a process to rebuke or remove people. I'd cert

Re: [Development] OpenGL Support in Qt5

2012-07-16 Thread BRM
> From: Sean Harmer > On Monday 16 July 2012 07:21:23 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On segunda-feira, 16 de julho de 2012 15.12.15, Sean Harmer wrote: >> > On Monday 16 July 2012 07:08:38 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> > > I'm asking for Qt 5.0: what should we tell Linux distributors > to >> > > conf

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

2012-08-07 Thread BRM
> From: Oswald Buddenhagen > Subject: Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project > On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 11:00:26AM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: >> My recommendation is that master be one of the two stable branches. > That's >> what people cloning from Git should g

Re: [Development] Qt 5 beta

2012-08-30 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: Thiago Macieira > To: development@qt-project.org > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 1:07 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5 beta > > On quinta-feira, 30 de agosto de 2012 17.30.58, Laszlo Papp wrote: >> > I'd rather not bring back .tar.bz2. >> It is ok, if

Re: [Development] Qt 5 beta

2012-08-30 Thread BRM
> From: Jonas M. Gastal >To: development@qt-project.org; BRM >Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 4:02 PM >Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5 beta > >On Thursday 30 August 2012 11:48:38 BRM wrote: >> tar.bz2 is pretty common, along with tar.gz. >> tar.xy, OTOH, is quite

Re: [Development] Qt 5 beta

2012-08-31 Thread BRM
> From: "marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com" > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5 beta > On 31/08/2012 07:29, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: > Remember that 7z was fairly unknown at one point too, but has caught on > due to its extremely powerful compression, and is now well known and > accessible anywhere.

Re: [Development] Branching for Qt 5 repositories

2012-09-28 Thread BRM
FWIW, +1. Ben - Original Message - > From: Hausmann Simon > To: Thiago Macieira ; "development@qt-project.org" > > Cc: > Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 4:22 AM > Subject: Re: [Development] Branching for Qt 5 repositories > > > Sounds great, especially the branch names. +1 > >

Re: [Development] Behavior change: A sane and consistent QPainter coordinate system in Qt 5

2012-10-11 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: Sorvig Morten > Subject: Re: [Development] Behavior change: A sane and consistent QPainter > coordinate system in Qt 5 > > > On Oct 11, 2012, at 1:57 PM, Samuel Rødal > wrote: >> >> It's unfortunate to potentially cause some extra trouble for a subset >

Re: [Development] Behavior changes in Qt

2012-10-15 Thread BRM
> From: Sorvig Morten >Subject: Re: [Development] Behavior changes in Qt >On Oct 11, 2012, at 4:06 PM, BRM wrote: >>> >> >> How about opt-in (via configure or extra flags) until the next major release? >> I don't think doing the opt-in/opt-out/manda

Re: [Development] renaming qmake for everyone (was: Re: Co-installation & library naming rules=)

2012-10-18 Thread BRM
> From: Oswald Buddenhagen >Subject: [Development] renaming qmake for everyone (was: Re: Co-installation & >library naming rules=) >[changed the subject to get some attention ... from a quick survey i >don't have the impression that many people grasp that this thread is >very much relevant for t

Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming

2012-10-20 Thread BRM
FWIW, +1 - with one modification - reflect at least the minor version in the install path - so $prefix/libexec/qt5.0, if not $prefix/libexec/qt5.0.0. I think there is probably a simple rule we could maintain: Keeping the names of developer visible tools the same is, IHMO, a must. Tools that are

Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming

2012-10-22 Thread BRM
> From: Konstantin Ritt > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 5:56 AM > Subject: Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming >>> > The easiest way to achieve that is probably to create a solution > based on >>> > files and you create a ~/.config/qconfig-maemo5 which shadows the > one in >>>

Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming

2012-10-22 Thread BRM
The more I read the various related threads, the more I think if qt-project is to do anything it should be to define to LSB/FHS how to configure Qt. I don't necessarily see consensus; but I do see a lot of questions that have gone unanswered. There seems to be a lot of objection to user tool nam

Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming

2012-10-23 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira >Subject: Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming >On segunda-feira, 22 de outubro de 2012 21.21.17, André Pönitz wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:08:38AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> > On segunda-feira, 22 de outubro de 2012 15.45.56, Oswald >> > Budden

Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming

2012-10-23 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 1:03 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] New proposal for the tool naming > > On terça-feira, 23 de outubro de 2012 16.33.05, Ziller Eike wrote: >> >> So that if you happen to have a "real" qmake instead of > the wrapper in >> >> the >> >

Re: [Development] Another method of registering QML types

2012-11-08 Thread BRM
> From: Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> > To: development > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2012 12:57 PM > Subject: [Development] Another method of registering QML types > > Currently, there is no way to register QML files as types from C++. > This is the exact same functionality that qml

Re: [Development] Another method of registering QML types

2012-11-08 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:49 PM, BRM wrote: >>> From: Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> >> >>> To: development >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Thursday, November 8,

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

2012-11-13 Thread BRM
> From: Koehne Kai > Friedemann said he'd like to have msvc 2010 64 bit as reference platform, > maybe replacing msvc 2010 32 bit. Problems I see is that we don't test it > right now in the CI system, and that e.g. qtwebkit has currently problems on > windows 64 bit. Agree with comments alrea

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

2012-11-13 Thread BRM
> From: "shane.kea...@accenture.com" > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 11:12 AM > Subject: RE: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 > platforms >> Win8 support would be nice to add, but please do not drop WinXP. >> MS may be dropping official, public support for WinXP

[Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
I am following up to some e-mails I sent on the feedback/interests/dev lists[1] and blogs[2] over a year ago for updating the QtService Component. I would like to open a new Qt Playground project to create a new equivalent for Qt5 that is more natively integrated. Synopsis: QtService Componen

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
> From: Matt Broadstone >On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Thiago Macieira >wrote: > >On segunda-feira, 26 de novembro de 2012 06.59.23, BRM wrote: >>> I am following up to some e-mails I sent on the feedback/interests/dev >>> lists[1] and blogs[2] over a ye

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
t;IMHO this would be a cross-platform useful module that I'd vote to ultimately >>end-up within "Qt-proper". >> >> >>Disclosure:  I traded emails with BRM off-list, and would like to help. >> >>--charley > >Would you guys like to get into your

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
gt;>>>>> equivalent >>> >>> >>>+1 >>>  >>>IMHO this would be a cross-platform useful module that I'd vote to >>>ultimately end-up within "Qt-proper". >>> >>> >>>Disclosure:  I traded emai

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
> From: Charley Bay >Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support > > >Hi, Matt-- > > >thoughts: >> >> >>a) I think the only reason the old QtService uses a template based approach >>is to support the different types of Q*Application. It would be quite useful >>to

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
> From: Matt Broadstone >Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support >On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:48 PM, BRM wrote: >> From: Charley Bay >Is there any word on whether you guys get a spot in playground? Since Thiago +1'd, I think I'm g

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-26 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: Sascha Cunz > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support > >> All services/daemons must be able to interface with other processes: > Here, I almost agree :-) > >>   (a)- a "client-process" can > "request-a-client-operation"

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-27 Thread BRM
> From: Lukas Geyer > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support > Am 27.11.2012 11:03, schrieb Sascha Cunz: >> [...] >>> The difference is that 'operate' and 'configure' are > two different tasks >>> and thus usually require two different interfaces. >>> The

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-11-28 Thread BRM
> From: BRM > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 9:39 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support >> From: Matt Broadstone >> Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support >> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:4

Re: [Development] Comparing two reals in Qt code

2012-11-29 Thread BRM
> From: Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 11:52 AM > Subject: Re: [Development] Comparing two reals in Qt code > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:53 AM, Sean Harmer wrote: >> On Thursday 29 November 2012 15:01:05 Dominik Holland wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> last

Re: [Development] Branching 5.0

2012-11-30 Thread BRM
> From: d3fault > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 11:25 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] Branching 5.0 > > On 11/30/12, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> He says that the converse usually holds true. First of all, converses >> usually >> do not hold true. Conditions that are both necessary and suffic

Re: [Development] Running Qt auto-tests offscreen

2012-12-07 Thread BRM
> From: Jedrzej Nowacki >Subject: Re: [Development] Running Qt auto-tests offscreen >On Friday 7. December 2012 16.55.41 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On sexta-feira, 7 de dezembro de 2012 11.04.27, Samuel Rødal wrote: >> > In the end, maybe we could even use this for a subset of the tests in >> > th

Re: [Development] Controlling QML Imports

2012-12-11 Thread BRM
> From: Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> >Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:46 PM >Subject: Re: [Development] Controlling QML Imports > >On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On terça-feira, 11 de dezembro de 2012 15.44.37, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: >>> > > > loading of nativ

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support

2012-12-12 Thread BRM
> From: Ahumada Sergio > To: development > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 2:19 AM > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Playground - Updating Daemon/Service Support > >> >>     As I know others have expressed interest in helping out, here's the >>     bug report in case you want to join/watch:

Re: [Development] Gdb pretty printers for Qt 5

2013-01-07 Thread BRM
> From: Niko Sams > Sent: Sunday, January 6, 2013 3:49 PM > Subject: [Development] Gdb pretty printers for Qt 5 > years ago I started working on gdb pretty printers for Qt 4 that allow > printing eg. QString or QList values. Similar to what QtCreator does > but with one big difference: it also wo

Re: [Development] Evolving Qt's multithreading API

2013-02-26 Thread BRM
I've been sitting silent on this, but I am quite in favor of having an easy to understand approach to using QThreads, which the proposal in this thread seems to be. > From: Thiago Macieira > To: development@qt-project.org > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 11:06 AM > Subject: Re: [Development]

Re: [Development] Evolving Qt's multithreading API

2013-02-26 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira > To: development@qt-project.org > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:46 AM > Subject: Re: [Development] Evolving Qt's multithreading API > > On terça-feira, 26 de fevereiro de 2013 07.03.37, BRM wrote: >> Personally, I can

Re: [Development] [Interest] Apologies on the "bloat" thread (a.k.a yes Windows is still important)

2013-04-12 Thread BRM
FYI - having observed and read the conversation on the Interests list, these are not people using git that are complaining. They are people that are pulling the source archives for releases from the website; no git involved. For example: http://download.qt-project.org/official_releases/qt/5.0/5.

Re: [Development] Qt5 combined source package - Perl dependency

2013-04-26 Thread BRM
Having participated in the discussion on the Interests list... Aside from what Andre' said... > From: Joerg Bornemann >To: Friedemann Kleint >Cc: development@qt-project.org >Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 11:35 AM >Subject: Re: [Development] Qt5 combined source package - Perl dependency >On 2

Re: [Development] kdelibs coding style

2013-05-02 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira >To: development@qt-project.org >Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 11:09 AM >Subject: Re: [Development] kdelibs coding style >On quinta-feira, 2 de maio de 2013 16.12.00, Daniel Teske wrote: >> > I tried to compromise, but it seems like we don't want to compromise. >> Apparentl

Re: [Development] Qt Playground - CAN bus add-on module

2013-06-11 Thread BRM
Just FYI - from what I am aware from building the Linux Kernel from time to time there is some CAN support there too. So you might want to add that to your list as well, or at least look at it. $0.02 Ben > > From: Denis Shienkov >To: development@qt-project.or

Re: [Development] Disabling exception support in QtCore?

2013-10-10 Thread BRM
On Thursday, October 10, 2013 9:26 AM, Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Thursday 10 October 2013 15:14:02 André Somers wrote: > > Op 10-10-2013 14:53, Olivier Goffart schreef: > > > On Thursday 03 October 2013 10:38:59 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > >> On quinta-feira, 3 de outubro de 2013 10:36:44, Oli

Re: [Development] Qt Commercial 4.8.0 release delta to LGPL version

2011-12-19 Thread BRM
> From: David Faure >To: craig.sc...@csiro.au >Cc: development@qt-project.org >Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 3:40 AM >Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Commercial 4.8.0 release delta to LGPL version > >On Saturday 17 December 2011 09:01:35 craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote: >> On 16/12/2011, at 10:37 P

Re: [Development] Dropping QT_NO_STL (was: The future of QtAlgorithms)

2012-02-01 Thread BRM
Sorry, I'm a little late to the conversation - got behind a bit... > From: Thiago Macieira >On Monday, 30 de January de 2012 16.32.38, Olivier Goffart wrote: >> On Monday 30 January 2012 16:13:48 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> > We definitely want: >> >  - the language support library (chapter 18) >>

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-01 Thread BRM
Getting caught up again... - Original Message - > From: Lincoln Ramsay > On 01/31/2012 05:08 PM, ext Jordi Pujol wrote: >> - Crazy idea : allow logging to a socket ? ( remote log/debug ) >> - More than one logging file ? One file for every category / group of >> categories >> - Log

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-01 Thread BRM
> From: David Faure > On Wednesday 01 February 2012 10:02:00 BRM wrote: >> I would also suggest that the plugins use a standard public interface class >> such as QAbstractLogFacility, like QTcpSocket uses QAbstractSocket - so >> that people can add their own cust

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-02 Thread BRM
, > whatever else) can be left to an external library. I think the > _gathering_ of all that data (as an extension to qDebug) does belong in > core, of course, but I think we should not go towards setting up a whole > complicated output mechamism now. +1 agreed.   > I think you a

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-02 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: "wolfgang.b...@nokia.com" > To: robin...@viroteck.net; david.fa...@kdab.com > Cc: development@qt-project.org > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2012 6:00 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends) > > I think we can change the current QLog.

Re: [Development] Work on qDebug and friends

2012-02-03 Thread BRM
> From: David Faure > On Friday 03 February 2012 10:51:50 kai.koe...@nokia.com wrote: >> Finally I came around to actually implement something: >> >> http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,15129 >> >> The idea is that you can customize the output by setting the >> QT_DEBUG_PATTERN environm

Re: [Development] Work on qDebug and friends

2012-02-05 Thread BRM
> From: Diego Iastrubni >On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:10 PM, David Faure wrote: > >Once this goes in I'll add support for %pid%, %processname% and %timestamp%, >>and we'll be all set :) > >You meant %threadid% of course... right? Wouldn't having both available be useful? Ben

Re: [Development] Work on qDebug and friends

2012-02-06 Thread BRM
> From: David Faure > To: development@qt-project.org; Diego Iastrubni > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2012 5:54 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] Work on qDebug and friends > > On Sunday 05 February 2012 10:50:48 BRM wrote: >> > From: Diego Iastrubni >> &

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-07 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: "kai.koe...@nokia.com" > To: wolfgang.b...@nokia.com; development@qt-project.org > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2012 2:26 AM > Subject: Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends) > > Hi Wolfgang, > > how about making the category a distinct typ

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-09 Thread BRM
> From: "kai.koe...@nokia.com" >> -Original Message- >> From: Beck Wolfgang (Nokia-MP/Brisbane) >> I think this was a very good idea so I've tried it but I've run into one >> important >> problem. >> If I use this trick I have to call the overloaded function in QMessageLogger: >> e.g. >>

Re: [Development] QMetaTypeId and QMetaTypeId2

2012-02-09 Thread BRM
> From: Olivier Goffart > On Thursday 09 February 2012 10:42:07 Thiago Macieira wrote: >>  On Thursday, 9 de February de 2012 10.07.16, Jedrzej Nowacki wrote: >>  > Hi, >>  > >>  >   Does anybody know why we have separation between QMetaTypeId and >>  > >>  > QMetaTypeId2 classes? >> >>  Becaus

Re: [Development] RFC: The Future of QDoc

2012-02-09 Thread BRM
> From: "casper.vandonde...@nokia.com" >Just to add what I think to Marius' comments: >1. Doxygen would need some extra features, the major one being QML, but also >being able to use index files to easily link for instance the Creator docs to >the Qt docs. Why would Doxygen need QML itself? O

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-10 Thread BRM
> From: "wolfgang.b...@nokia.com" > The controlling of the category will be done using a configuration file. > QLog contains a private class that creates a file watcher for the > configuration > file. > So not only if you start the application but during runtime as well the > category > filter

Re: [Development] RFC: The Future of QDoc

2012-02-10 Thread BRM
> From: "casper.vandonde...@nokia.com" > On 2/9/12 10:44 PM, "ext BRM" wrote: >>> From: "casper.vandonde...@nokia.com" > >>> Just to add what I think to Marius' comments: >>> 1. Doxygen would need some extra features,

Re: [Development] Default enabling inbound flow control on sockets

2012-02-10 Thread BRM
> From: "shane.kea...@accenture.com" >T he current default behaviour of Qt sockets is that they allocate an >unbounded > amount of memory if the application is not reading all data from the socket > but > the event loop is running. > In the worst case, this causes memory allocation failure res

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-14 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: "kai.koe...@nokia.com" >> -Original Message- >> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=nokia@qt-project.org >> [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=nokia@qt-project.org] On >> Behalf Of Ramsay Lincoln (Nokia-MP/Brisbane) >> Sent: Monday, F

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-14 Thread BRM
elopment-bounces+kai.koehne=nokia@qt-project.org >> [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=nokia@qt-project.org] On >> Behalf Of ext BRM >> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 3:00 PM >> To: development@qt-project.org >> Subject: Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on q

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-15 Thread BRM
> From: Lincoln Ramsay > To: development@qt-project.org > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 8:05 PM > Subject: Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends) > > On 02/15/2012 01:47 AM, ext BRM wrote: >> I'd much rather see a Category obj

Re: [Development] Changing qreal to a float

2012-02-15 Thread BRM
> From: "lars.kn...@nokia.com" > On 2/15/12 12:11 PM, "ext Olivier Goffart" wrote: >> On Wednesday 15 February 2012 22:02:10 craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote: >>> On 15/02/2012, at 8:58 PM, >>> >> wrote: >>> > On 2/15/12 10:28 AM, "ext Thiago Macieira" > >>> > >>> > wrote: >>> >> On quarta-f

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-15 Thread BRM
> From: Lincoln Ramsay >To: BRM >On 02/16/2012 02:14 AM, ext BRM wrote: >>> This fails the "do nothing quickly" test so the cost of leaving >>> such statements in shipping code is high, even when the categories >>> are disabled. >>&g

Re: [Development] Changing qreal to a float

2012-02-16 Thread BRM
> From: "lars.kn...@nokia.com" > On 2/16/12 6:21 PM, "ext Girish Ramakrishnan" > > wrote: > >> Hi Lars, >> >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:03 AM,  wrote: >>> On 2/16/12 12:16 PM, "ext Giuseppe D'Angelo" > wrote: >>> On 15 February 2012 22:56, Sean Harmer > wrote: > On 15/02/2012

Re: [Development] QLog ( Work on qDebug and friends)

2012-02-20 Thread BRM
- Original Message - > From: Thiago Macieira > On segunda-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2012 12.42.49, David Faure wrote: >> > Do you imagine something in the qLog config file? An environment >> > variable? A C++ API? >> >> I think "something in the qLog config file" is the best option.

Re: [Development] Changing qreal to a float

2012-02-21 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira > On terça-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2012 09.59.49, Marc Mutz wrote: >> A tangential question: should QRect be QBasicRect (in which case > it >> would  probably have a class invariant of right()-left()==width() instead >> of width()-1 as now. If there is a plan to move

Re: [Development] Deprecating QString::{v,}sprintf()

2012-02-21 Thread BRM
> From: Olivier Goffart > On Tuesday 21 February 2012 14:03:26 Marc Mutz wrote: >> On Tuesday February 21 2012, Marc Mutz wrote: >> > On Tuesday February 21 2012, Marc Mutz wrote: >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > The QString header contains a ### about removing sprintf() in > 5.0, but >> > > it's

Re: [Development] (long) thoughts on categorized logging (qLog)

2012-02-24 Thread BRM
> From: Lincoln Ramsay > On 02/23/2012 09:48 PM, ext David Faure wrote: >>> # write output to a file (in the user's home directory) >>> logging.output.file = file.txt >> >> I suppose Windows users would expect relative paths to be "in the CWD, > which >> is usually the executable's director

Re: [Development] (long) thoughts on categorized logging (qLog)

2012-02-24 Thread BRM
> From: "shane.kea...@accenture.com" > To: bm_witn...@yahoo.com; lincoln.ram...@nokia.com; david.fa...@kdab.com > Cc: development@qt-project.org > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 10:46 AM > Subject: RE: [Development] (long) thoughts on categorized logging (qLog) >> well, it probably shouldn't be

Re: [Development] Memory Leak in QtWebKit

2012-02-29 Thread BRM
Just FYI - this is probably a better question for the qt-interests list as this list is focused on Qt5 at the moment (and post 5.0 after that). $0.02 BRM > > From: 陳敏華 >To: development@qt-project.org >Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 10:58

Re: [Development] Header file cleanups

2012-03-01 Thread BRM
> From: Thiago Macieira >On quinta-feira, 1 de março de 2012 12.44.47, Mathias Hasselmann wrote: >> > According to the book it is. But in practice it happens all the time, and >> > we know it. >> >> To which book? C++ compilers and IDEs give zero support in enforcing >> direct includes. Consider

Re: [Development] Header file cleanups

2012-03-01 Thread BRM
> From: Olivier Goffart >On Thursday 01 March 2012 12:44:47 Mathias Hasselmann wrote: >> Sadly, considering the slowness of g++ and the complexity of Qt, I doubt >> this is a reasonable approach for Qt. >That's what pre-compiled header are for. Not everyone uses pre-compiled headers, nor should

Re: [Development] Header file cleanups

2012-03-05 Thread BRM
> From: Joerg Bornemann >On 01/03/2012 16:43, ext BRM wrote: > >> For years, Microsoft advocated the use of simply including the "windows.h" >> header file. However, this ultimately led to a very very big problem - one >> that ended up with circular depen

Re: [Development] Header file cleanups

2012-03-05 Thread BRM
> From: Joerg Bornemann > On 05/03/2012 16:49, ext BRM wrote: > >> So why start a situation that could lead to that kind of interdependencies > within Qt or Qt applications? > > I wasn't proposing anything like this; was just curious. :) > I'm strictly ag

Re: [Development] Documentation proposal: Remove recommended reading list of 20-year-old books

2015-09-01 Thread BRM
Question: How does this affect the reading list for the Qt Certifications? It's been a while since I looked at it, but are the two reading lists not the same?I'd probably suggest going more that direction - what's good for the technologies that Qt uses and how can one improve oneself to help in w

Re: [Development] Request for a new playground project

2016-02-12 Thread BRM via Development
Sounds great as well...while I'd like something for Mobile, I also need something accessible for non-Mobile so the two can easily integrate.(E.g mobile applications and desktop applications integrating for a shared experience). $0.02 Ben On Friday, February 12, 2016 10:10 AM, ekke wrote: