Op 21/07/2016 om 17:17 schreef Tomasz Olszak:
Hi,
I encountered something that bothers me for a few days. I would be
thankful if someone can point nice workaround for such case:
class MyClass {
Q_OBJECT
Q_PROPERTY(MyEnum myEnumProperty ...)
Q_PROPERTY(QVariantList availableVa
I'm not sure if this is what you are looking for but here is waht I do:
main.cpp: qmlRegisterType("Qt", 1, 0, "QCryptographicHash");
class HashFunction: public QObject {
Q_OBJECT
Q_ENUMS(HashFunctionEnum)
public:
enum HashFunctionEnum {
Md4 = QCryptographicHash::Md4,
Md5
From waht I can tell: Qt seems to match on source string AND disambiguation
If you provide qsTr("back") it will match any "back"
If you provide qsTr("back", "dorsal") it will only match qsTr("back", "dorsal")
Meaning don't use the diambugation text unless it is actually needed, otherise you a
Hi all,
Since Version 5.6/5.7 the trick with defining the glew.h before
everything else does not work anymore and now I have troubles compiling
my code. It works under 5.5.1.
The QT Moc step stops compiling at the first native OpenGL call and says
that the function is not defined (e.g. glIsVe
Hi,
In our project, we'd do it like this-
// someFile1.qml
Text {
text: qsTranslate("Messages", "Hello")
}
// someFile2.qml
Text {
text: qsTranslate("Messages", "Hello")
}
Button {
text: qsTranslate("Actions", "Create")
}
Even when there are two usages of "Hello", Linguist will show
Hello dev team,
I have one sabre automative board and one beaglebone black.
I just started my trial on Qt embedded but couldn't manage to install Qt
application to both cards.
I am following these documentations:
http://doc.qt.io/QtForDeviceCreation/qtee-preparing-hardware-beaglebone.html
On 22 July 2016 at 21:49, André Somers wrote:
>
>
> Op 22/07/2016 om 11:41 schreef Ch'Gans:
>
>> On 22 July 2016 at 20:25, Jean-Michaël Celerier
>> wrote:
I was pointed out that there's a potential LGPLv3 license
>>>
>>> infringement, although I understand where the FUD is coming from,
Op 22/07/2016 om 11:41 schreef Ch'Gans:
On 22 July 2016 at 20:25, Jean-Michaël Celerier
wrote:
I was pointed out that there's a potential LGPLv3 license
infringement, although I understand where the FUD is coming from, I
think that it is OK to read LGPLv3 source code to get inspired as long
On 22 July 2016 at 20:25, Jean-Michaël Celerier
wrote:
>> I was pointed out that there's a potential LGPLv3 license
> infringement, although I understand where the FUD is coming from, I
> think that it is OK to read LGPLv3 source code to get inspired as long
> as you don't blindly copy/paste code
On 22 July 2016 at 20:10, Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My personal experience is that it will depend on the countries in
> which you develop
> and distribute your software.
>
> In France for instance software are protected by "author's rights" which
> implies
> that to be protected a piece o
> I was pointed out that there's a potential LGPLv3 license
infringement, although I understand where the FUD is coming from, I
think that it is OK to read LGPLv3 source code to get inspired as long
as you don't blindly copy/paste code (In my case i checked out quite a
few articles and forum thread
Hi,
My personal experience is that it will depend on the countries in
which you develop
and distribute your software.
In France for instance software are protected by "author's rights" which implies
that to be protected a piece of code must have some kind of creativity and/or
originality. So my g
12 matches
Mail list logo
