The Lounge

@Joel-Bodenmann One of the reasons I stick to real CPUs. ;) Joke aside, I leave that not-enough ram/CPU time struggle to engineers/embedded devs, I don't have the stomach for it to be honest. :D As a side note I'm not completely convinced using #define for constants is really warranted. If you're doing a comparison for example, this would (if I remember correctly) expand to something along the lines of: mov eax, 0x... # Set the constant test eax, [0x...] # Do the comparison with a field from memory If you use a simple constant (const static variable), the above should be pretty much the same: mov eax, [0x...] # Set the constant (from memory this time) test eax, [0x...] # Do the comparison with a field from memory

@Teh-Me You're welcome. PS. Please mark the topic as solved.

I have already facing problem in QT 4 so now trying to QT 5 .Now I am going to use QT 5 for set top box .In that I am going to use fancy browser .

Hi and welcome to devnet, What do you mean by enable debug prints in Qt 4.8.5 ? For your application of in Qt itself ? On a side note, your version is a bit old. You should consider to switch to at least 4.8.7 if not Qt 5.

@Chris-Kawa One of them is that "the closest match" is chosen i.e. for f(a, 3) a free standing function would be preferred, and, if there isn't one, members of A are checked for match. Which would basically mean to pile on the ever so problematic partial inference of types, and as you said add yet another level of complexity for the programmer. One of the big critiques about C++ is it's implicit conversion (I suppose inherited through C) and this "unified call" syntax just makes that ever more implicit. but apparently (fortunately) that would break too much code out there. Thank god for small favors ... :) I really don't like all this, but to be entirely fair, members are really no different from free functions and "this" injection is just a syntax sugar. Sure, however the purpose of having members is to have the "this" injection. Otherwise we'd all write functions that operate on POD structures ... oh, well, we used to do it so why would be so reluctant to do it again ...? On some level it would make sense... i guess... ugh, no, I still don't like it :P I'm with you, Chris, sadly I don't get to vote!

I liked the old color better (was a little bit nicer to the eye), but the new shape is a huge improvement. The old icon looked... well old somehow. Also, I think if used everywhere, this icon will increase Qt's recognition (as it stands out more and is easily remembered and distinguished from any other green icon).

Thanks, Yes known issue, and hopefully fixed very soon now.

Hi @muun Could you please explain what exactly is the problem. From the perspective of someone who would like to fix the issue it isn't "nuff said". We try not to use colours (especially the reb/green combination) to signify options. Colour may be used to present something or to highlight something. Also green is the colour of Qt, so that will not go away. The font colours were darkened from the original to make things more readable. The background for the essential text is white, with very dark gray (or black) text. Also, you really get a better response when you do not swear in your topic.

OK many thanks, will try that tomorrow now, am out of work... Keep you posted ! EDIT : Hello, sorry for the late reply, it's OK now it works, i just install new libraries (Qt5.6) and the new QtCreator. Thanks a lot once again. Just one more information do i have to keep a relica of the old qt creator version ?

Thanks @JKSH, if you ever move to Melbourne... ;) @tekojo said If you do get a group together, please ping, I can provide some small swag for the first meetup. Thanks, will do :) Also @Charby has started a good thread with materials for meetups Excellent! I've bookmarked that thread now :) Thanks again. pc.

Hi, It wasn't the cookies, I relaxed the filter at about the same time as you posted. Getting the filtering right is hard, sorry for the inconvenience.

Hi, That's really vague. From your description it could be anything. What library are you using ? How are you using it with Qt ?

Our March meetup session materials are now available. This time, the workshop aim was to discover the Qt.controls.labs. This time, I didn't create a new project for the workshop but used the Gallery example.

@ JKSH... That's not quite accurate. In fact, I currently use MinGW-64 along with Code::Blocks to develop cross-platform apps which work on both my Windows 10 and Ubuntu systems. I have to change some compiler parameter settings in the Code::Blocks IDE, make a few changes to the make file, then recompile for each different OS. But I use the same compiler and don't have to make any changes to my code. https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/wiki2/CrossQuickstart/ I'm quite happy with Code::Blocks and MinGW-64. I was just curious to learn more about the Qt libraries and to see if I might like them better than the xWidgets libraries for GUI development. While MinGW-64 was a beast to configure for use with Code::Blocks as well, I have a friend set it up for me the first time and she made screen shots of the entire process. Pictures are worth a thousand words, so any time I have to re-install Code::Blocks I just follow the pictures and in about 2 minutes all works perfectly. But I suppose my question was answered earlier. I've pretty much come to the conclusion that Qt will do what I need, at least not without time-consuming rebuilds or workarounds, and that I should stick with the familiarity of Code::Blocks, Xojo, and Lazarus for cross-platform development, and Visual Studio (C++ and VB.NET) for WIndows only development.

@Sajad-Manal what about this? it looks some guys in Finland are pursuing similar goals. Good luck!

another useful editor for dataflow programming Qt: FloDiEdi https://sourceforge.net/projects/flodiedi/?source=directory

http://blog.qt.io/blog/2016/02/16/the-qt-company-joins-khronos-group-and-promotes-vulkan/

@tomy You might be the only one seeing the bookmark, AFAIK it is local. Therefore probably nobody is going find and answer your specific question. Even though it is not strongly encouraged in this forum, I suggest that you are starting a new thread with a title already giving an understanding of your problems.