The Lounge

@jeremy_k said in looking for agnostic embedded forum:

Implementation agnostic discussions tend to be very theoretical.

I would't say "theoretical". I mean, there are standard ways to do things in the embedded world, regardless of who the vendor is. But yes, the question is how much abstraction crap vendors layer over top of of the basic EE operations, and then call it their "innovation".

For ARM achitecture you're still always going to be doing bit logic operations on memory mapped registers.

@andr Ah ok good to know. From what I've gathered, the bottom line is that the forum only supports Markdown and no HTML?

@SimonSchroeder : "have support built in for GIT as the only VC" - I am not sure what the "only" here refers to, as there's also support for others, including Perforce (and Subversion, and CVS, and..), but I guess it's fair to say that git currently looks like the winner in the VC arena in this part of the world.

@younicoin Yes i think you have to declare and register the Meta Type BitcoinUnits::Unit. check this https://forum.qt.io/topic/142878/qvariant-unknown-user-type

About six years later, same issue. Unable to register because confirmation email is not sent. I see that the last person registered in January so I suppose this is not just me having this problem. Used some problem reporting form on their website, no reply either. If anyone is in contact with their staff, could you notify them about the issue with their website?

So far, I have only used the LGPL version of Qt. However, I believe that nothing in the commercial license is forcing you to disclose the use of Qt. It most likely depends on the Qt license they are using if they are doing something illegal. FFmpeg would be a different story, though, as most of the library is only available under the GPL or LGPL.

If this is "just beer talk", then I truly wonder why I get summoned ...

@AnneRanch said in another goofy "feature ":

@kshegunov Yes - it must be hard for linker to find the function in #ifdef BYPASS ...#endif block.
That is UNUSED code block...

Indeed it must be hard for the linker, since the linker has no notion of source code, nor of #ifdef and alike preprocessor tokens. I think I've mentioned before, that it's truly beneficial to know C++ before claiming to use it, or a library for it.

In any case, the linker sees the prototype of the function (which is its name, also called a symbol) and it has the singular task of linking all calls to that function to the place that symbol is defined (at low level). There's no source at this point, no preprocessor, no compiler or w/e. The linker is the same machinery for all languages on a platform.

Even if it was used code block - how did it get placed there ?

This question is for you to answer. I'm certainly not going to ask my crystal ball.

@AnneRanch Luckily there are billions of cakes :P

Perhaps a preview toggle would be useful as to prevent clutter while choosing layout while still having the option to see the result before confirming. I would recommend using icons instead of words for the preview toggle and confirmation button as the idea's theme is about order and aesthetics.

@AnneRanch

In general, subdirs work very well in Qt. There are hardly any known issues, especially given the fact that 4000-5000 lines is actually a small project, not a large one.
To force-clear solved errors from the editor, Build->Rescan Project helps.

You have posted various topics around this issue already and you got help from many contributors in this forum. Sadly, in most cases you just stopped communicating, when your supporters asked for information, specific code or local tests.

Since you are an opensource community member, I strongly recommend to stay responsive to other community members who volunteer to help you. Ignoring questions aiming at a solution, leaving posts abandoned and asking the same question in a new one - is discouraged.

To refresh your memory, and as a reference for others: here are your earlier posts related to the topic.

Posts about issues with a subdirs project, where you stopped to respond:
https://forum.qt.io/topic/152821/cannot-find-library (last question ignored)
https://forum.qt.io/topic/153104/one-more-time-include-question-linux (duplicate)
https://forum.qt.io/topic/152821/cannot-find-library/19 (last question ignored)

Posts somehow related to the issue:
https://forum.qt.io/topic/152939/more-small-issues-folder-names-changed (same topic, question unclear)
https://forum.qt.io/topic/152720/another-include-issue-how-to-print-the-path (kind of related and solved)
https://forum.qt.io/topic/152775/more-include-question (related)
https://forum.qt.io/topic/152347/how-to-copy-the-entire-subproject-to-where-and-be-able-to-reload-it (related)

Hi and welcome to devnet,

Looks like you might want to check QDataWidgetMapper.

You are correct that creating one widget per entry in your view is not a good design choice.

@AnneRanch
What do you want to tell us?

I think my suggestion is that the current state of the project is a proof of concept. If it fails to gain interest, then it may never pass to another phase. However, if others are interested, then the scale of the project may expand. Is it not often the case, for many important projects, perhaps C++ itself, of beginning on a small and personal scale?

File name conventions should be consistent. The examples, including your last proposal show little consistency being applied by the user. That's confusing.

Answering the title question "How about little consistency?": Not a good idea. Full consistency is much better than little consistency, or even no consistency.

If you are interested to learn about our coding style, this might help you.

@SGaist @jsulm Changing the mirror seems to be the solution. I used the following for successful Qt installation...

qt-unified-windows-x64-4.6.1-online.exe --mirror http://ftp2.nluug.nl/languages/qt

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HELPFUL RESPONSES!