Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Search
  • Get Qt Extensions
  • Unsolved
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. Qt Development
  3. General and Desktop
  4. Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?
QtWS25 Last Chance

Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved General and Desktop
qsqltablemodelqstandarditemmodata modelsproxiessoftware design
35 Posts 5 Posters 8.2k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • E elfring
    30 Oct 2018, 13:49

    Nobody here needs to convert/switch between QSqlTableModel and QStandardItemModel.

    I am experimenting with such a transformation for a specific software application for a while.

    J Offline
    J Offline
    JKSH
    Moderators
    wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 13:59 last edited by
    #26

    @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

    I am experimenting with such a transformation for a specific software application for a while.

    Then I suggest you make the changes yourself.

    If you want someone else to make the changes, you must first explain your project in lots of detail (write many paragraphs to explain what you are trying to do!) and you must convince us that it is worth spending time to make the changes in Qt. Remember, the changes must also avoid introducing new problems.

    Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

    E 1 Reply Last reply 30 Oct 2018, 14:07
    0
    • J JKSH
      30 Oct 2018, 13:59

      @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

      I am experimenting with such a transformation for a specific software application for a while.

      Then I suggest you make the changes yourself.

      If you want someone else to make the changes, you must first explain your project in lots of detail (write many paragraphs to explain what you are trying to do!) and you must convince us that it is worth spending time to make the changes in Qt. Remember, the changes must also avoid introducing new problems.

      E Offline
      E Offline
      elfring
      wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 14:07 last edited by
      #27

      …, you must first explain your project in lots of detail …

      I am trying to achieve something also for another free software application (as you might have noticed already).
      The possible design decisions have got further consequences on the corresponding software development efforts.

      J 1 Reply Last reply 30 Oct 2018, 14:18
      0
      • E elfring
        30 Oct 2018, 14:07

        …, you must first explain your project in lots of detail …

        I am trying to achieve something also for another free software application (as you might have noticed already).
        The possible design decisions have got further consequences on the corresponding software development efforts.

        J Offline
        J Offline
        JKSH
        Moderators
        wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 14:18 last edited by
        #28

        @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

        I am trying to achieve something also for another free software application (as you might have noticed already).

        Please provide a link to the application.

        The possible design decisions have got further consequences on the corresponding software development efforts.

        This is very vague, so I still cannot understand what you're trying to achieve. The application can use a QSqlTableModel without converting it to a QStandardItemModel, right?

        Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

        E 1 Reply Last reply 30 Oct 2018, 14:32
        0
        • J JKSH
          30 Oct 2018, 14:18

          @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

          I am trying to achieve something also for another free software application (as you might have noticed already).

          Please provide a link to the application.

          The possible design decisions have got further consequences on the corresponding software development efforts.

          This is very vague, so I still cannot understand what you're trying to achieve. The application can use a QSqlTableModel without converting it to a QStandardItemModel, right?

          E Offline
          E Offline
          elfring
          wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 14:32 last edited by
          #29

          Please provide a link to the application.

          Do you care for any evolution around the software “Cppcheck”?

          The application can use a QSqlTableModel without converting it to a QStandardItemModel, right?

          I can imagine such a software development option.
          But a published program has got a strong dependency on Qt standard items so far.

          J 1 Reply Last reply 30 Oct 2018, 14:48
          0
          • E elfring
            30 Oct 2018, 14:32

            Please provide a link to the application.

            Do you care for any evolution around the software “Cppcheck”?

            The application can use a QSqlTableModel without converting it to a QStandardItemModel, right?

            I can imagine such a software development option.
            But a published program has got a strong dependency on Qt standard items so far.

            J Offline
            J Offline
            JKSH
            Moderators
            wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 14:48 last edited by
            #30

            @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

            Please provide a link to the application.

            Do you care for any evolution around the software “Cppcheck”?

            The application can use a QSqlTableModel without converting it to a QStandardItemModel, right?

            I can imagine such a software development option.
            But a published program has got a strong dependency on Qt standard items so far.

            @elfring, the maintainer for Cppcheck asked you to stop. The right thing to do is to respect his wishes.

            Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

            E 1 Reply Last reply 30 Oct 2018, 15:04
            0
            • J JKSH
              30 Oct 2018, 14:48

              @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

              Please provide a link to the application.

              Do you care for any evolution around the software “Cppcheck”?

              The application can use a QSqlTableModel without converting it to a QStandardItemModel, right?

              I can imagine such a software development option.
              But a published program has got a strong dependency on Qt standard items so far.

              @elfring, the maintainer for Cppcheck asked you to stop. The right thing to do is to respect his wishes.

              E Offline
              E Offline
              elfring
              wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 15:04 last edited by
              #31

              the maintainer for Cppcheck asked you to stop.

              I find it strange that you interpret available information in this direction.

              The right thing to do is to respect his wishes.

              He stumbles also on some understanding difficulties in several software development areas.

              The evolution will be continued also for a known source code analysis software.
              I am curious on how the corresponding graphical user interface can be improved further.

              J 1 Reply Last reply 30 Oct 2018, 22:32
              0
              • E elfring
                30 Oct 2018, 15:04

                the maintainer for Cppcheck asked you to stop.

                I find it strange that you interpret available information in this direction.

                The right thing to do is to respect his wishes.

                He stumbles also on some understanding difficulties in several software development areas.

                The evolution will be continued also for a known source code analysis software.
                I am curious on how the corresponding graphical user interface can be improved further.

                J Offline
                J Offline
                JKSH
                Moderators
                wrote on 30 Oct 2018, 22:32 last edited by JKSH
                #32

                @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

                the maintainer for Cppcheck asked you to stop.

                I find it strange that you interpret available information in this direction.

                This is the only way to interpret "I do not want that you work more on Cppcheck."

                The right thing to do is to respect his wishes.

                He stumbles also on some understanding difficulties in several software development areas.

                That is not relevant. You can't use that as an excuse to ignore someone's wishes.

                Do you know why he rejected your changes? One big reason is because you ignore requests/instructions. For example, he said "please rename 'do_stuff' to 'doStuff'" and "I would prefer to see some small refactoring PRs first." ...but you refused.

                Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

                E 1 Reply Last reply 31 Oct 2018, 09:15
                2
                • J JKSH
                  30 Oct 2018, 22:32

                  @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

                  the maintainer for Cppcheck asked you to stop.

                  I find it strange that you interpret available information in this direction.

                  This is the only way to interpret "I do not want that you work more on Cppcheck."

                  The right thing to do is to respect his wishes.

                  He stumbles also on some understanding difficulties in several software development areas.

                  That is not relevant. You can't use that as an excuse to ignore someone's wishes.

                  Do you know why he rejected your changes? One big reason is because you ignore requests/instructions. For example, he said "please rename 'do_stuff' to 'doStuff'" and "I would prefer to see some small refactoring PRs first." ...but you refused.

                  E Offline
                  E Offline
                  elfring
                  wrote on 31 Oct 2018, 09:15 last edited by
                  #33

                  This is the only way to interpret "I do not want that you work more on Cppcheck."

                  Such information was given on 2018-10-14. The maintainer mentioned further details for his reasoning.

                  I pointed related clarification possibilities out for his software development concerns.

                  That is not relevant.

                  We stumble on some understanding difficulties in several situations. I find that they become more interesting when they hinder progress in desired development directions.

                  You can't use that as an excuse to ignore someone's wishes.

                  I guess that there is a general interest conflict involved. Contributors would like to adjust specific software components here.

                  Do you know why he rejected your changes?

                  I can see published information. But I guess that additional aspects should be considered as the background for such feedback.

                  One big reason is because you ignore requests/instructions.

                  I chose to respond in different ways again.

                  ...but you refused.

                  • How do you think about my feedback to the mentioned considerations?
                  • Did you take any details from previous software development history into account for a better understanding of communication constraints?
                  • Would you like to pick any further opportunities up to clarify varying probabilities for (temporary) disagreements?
                  J 1 Reply Last reply 2 Nov 2018, 09:27
                  0
                  • E elfring
                    31 Oct 2018, 09:15

                    This is the only way to interpret "I do not want that you work more on Cppcheck."

                    Such information was given on 2018-10-14. The maintainer mentioned further details for his reasoning.

                    I pointed related clarification possibilities out for his software development concerns.

                    That is not relevant.

                    We stumble on some understanding difficulties in several situations. I find that they become more interesting when they hinder progress in desired development directions.

                    You can't use that as an excuse to ignore someone's wishes.

                    I guess that there is a general interest conflict involved. Contributors would like to adjust specific software components here.

                    Do you know why he rejected your changes?

                    I can see published information. But I guess that additional aspects should be considered as the background for such feedback.

                    One big reason is because you ignore requests/instructions.

                    I chose to respond in different ways again.

                    ...but you refused.

                    • How do you think about my feedback to the mentioned considerations?
                    • Did you take any details from previous software development history into account for a better understanding of communication constraints?
                    • Would you like to pick any further opportunities up to clarify varying probabilities for (temporary) disagreements?
                    J Offline
                    J Offline
                    JKSH
                    Moderators
                    wrote on 2 Nov 2018, 09:27 last edited by JKSH 11 Feb 2018, 09:31
                    #34

                    @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

                    This is the only way to interpret "I do not want that you work more on Cppcheck."

                    Such information was given on 2018-10-14. The maintainer mentioned further details for his reasoning.

                    Please tell me what his reasoning was. Write it in your own words, to show that you understood his reasons; don't just post a link.

                    I pointed related clarification possibilities out for his software development concerns.

                    I see that you submitted a bug fix and it was accepted: https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/pull/1457. That was a good post, well done!

                    Please make your future posts like this, because writing good code is the best way to address software development concerns.

                    Do you know why he rejected your changes?

                    I can see published information. But I guess that additional aspects should be considered as the background for such feedback.

                    Don't just look at published information. Think about other people's feelings too.

                    I was trying to explain to you: When you submit a change that ignores requests/instructions, that change is likely to get rejected.

                    One big reason is because you ignore requests/instructions.

                    I chose to respond in different ways again.

                    When you choose to respond in different ways, it can cause conflict. Remember this.

                    ...but you refused.

                    • How do you think about my feedback to the mentioned considerations?

                    Which considerations do you mean? Please copy and paste here.

                    • Did you take any details from previous software development history into account for a better understanding of communication constraints?

                    I don't understand this question.

                    What language do you speak at home?

                    • Would you like to pick any further opportunities up to clarify varying probabilities for (temporary) disagreements?

                    If you are willing to listen, then I am willing to discuss things with you. But this post is already quite long, so I will take "further opportunities" next time.

                    Qt Doc Search for browsers: forum.qt.io/topic/35616/web-browser-extension-for-improved-doc-searches

                    E 1 Reply Last reply 2 Nov 2018, 11:46
                    2
                    • J JKSH
                      2 Nov 2018, 09:27

                      @elfring said in Conversion of a SQL model into a standard item model?:

                      This is the only way to interpret "I do not want that you work more on Cppcheck."

                      Such information was given on 2018-10-14. The maintainer mentioned further details for his reasoning.

                      Please tell me what his reasoning was. Write it in your own words, to show that you understood his reasons; don't just post a link.

                      I pointed related clarification possibilities out for his software development concerns.

                      I see that you submitted a bug fix and it was accepted: https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/pull/1457. That was a good post, well done!

                      Please make your future posts like this, because writing good code is the best way to address software development concerns.

                      Do you know why he rejected your changes?

                      I can see published information. But I guess that additional aspects should be considered as the background for such feedback.

                      Don't just look at published information. Think about other people's feelings too.

                      I was trying to explain to you: When you submit a change that ignores requests/instructions, that change is likely to get rejected.

                      One big reason is because you ignore requests/instructions.

                      I chose to respond in different ways again.

                      When you choose to respond in different ways, it can cause conflict. Remember this.

                      ...but you refused.

                      • How do you think about my feedback to the mentioned considerations?

                      Which considerations do you mean? Please copy and paste here.

                      • Did you take any details from previous software development history into account for a better understanding of communication constraints?

                      I don't understand this question.

                      What language do you speak at home?

                      • Would you like to pick any further opportunities up to clarify varying probabilities for (temporary) disagreements?

                      If you are willing to listen, then I am willing to discuss things with you. But this post is already quite long, so I will take "further opportunities" next time.

                      E Offline
                      E Offline
                      elfring
                      wrote on 2 Nov 2018, 11:46 last edited by
                      #35

                      I don't understand this question.

                      • How do you think about information from Cppcheck's forum and issue tracker?
                      • Do you care for software aspects which can be discussed there?
                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0

                      35/35

                      2 Nov 2018, 11:46

                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      35 out of 35
                      • First post
                        35/35
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups
                      • Search
                      • Get Qt Extensions
                      • Unsolved