Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: >> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 11:31:35AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: >> >> >>>> >>>>> I think this time we should go the long way. >>>>> >>>> I think we are still far away from a working solution. >>>> >>> But we can try ;-) >>> >> >> Yep, however, more than 1 year after the first attempt, I see no progress >> towards a not destabilizing patch. >> > > The main challenge is not really in using QProcess or not (but it could > help). It is the spliting of LaTeX::run(). In order to do desynchronized > latex compilation, we need to create a slot for each of the LateX run. > When we do that we could use ForkedCall instead of SystemCall, even if I > hate this interface. QProcess is much cleaner and capable than > ForkedCall... But I agree this is another story. > > Abdel. >
When we have SystemCall under control we could merge it with ForcedCall. Having QProcess in SystemCall makes ForcedCall obsolete. Peter
