https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358653
Bug ID: 358653
Summary: Umbrello crashed on close
Product: umbrello
Version: 2.14.2 (KDE Applications 4.14.2)
Platform: Mint (Ubuntu based)
OS: Linux
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
Bug ID: 358655
Summary: Umbrello does not import private class
Product: umbrello
Version: 2.14.2 (KDE Applications 4.14.2)
Platform: Mint (Ubuntu based)
OS: Linux
Status:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
--- Comment #4 from Ken Standard ---
Not seeing it here.
In fact the whole source import process is very rough and is not as intuitive
as one would expect.
I did not mention this before, to keep the issues separate. But whether you are
importing a pr
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
--- Comment #5 from Ken Standard ---
I have discovered an interesting phenomenon that affects this situation.
If the .pro file contains either comments (lines with #) or an
include(include.file) there is a log message that treats it as an error.
Als
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
--- Comment #8 from Ken Standard ---
OK, I will be "more specific".
Your #1: This will always be the case with PIMPL coding style. As I mentioned;
after removing the comments (lines with #) from the .pro
after removing the include(myfile.pri)
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
--- Comment #12 from Ken Standard ---
OK, maybe we are having a language barrier - not sure.
When talking about "project import" for a Qt project, you cannot ignore the
.pro file - it is the project. Are we redefining "project" to mean only the
.h,.hpp
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
--- Comment #16 from Ken Standard ---
I am kind of taken back by some of your comments.
Why would you need a test case for valid, commonly used, generic GNU C++
syntax? It seems unnecessary, redundant, and easily recreated.
I see that umbrello is not
