Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cannot view content of QVariant #43

Open
borro0 opened this issue Jan 25, 2021 · 5 comments
Open

Cannot view content of QVariant #43

borro0 opened this issue Jan 25, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@borro0
Copy link

borro0 commented Jan 25, 2021

I've setup a qt5.natvis file to see some qt debug info.

For QString and QVector it works.

However for QVariant, it doesn't show anything.
I'm in linux using gdb.

image

@tonka3000
Copy link
Owner

Which natvis file do you use?

@borro0
Copy link
Author

borro0 commented Jan 25, 2021 via email

@tonka3000
Copy link
Owner

I often use the official one https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt-labs/vstools.git/plain/src/qtvstools/qt5.natvis.xml, but this is the same file as you linked (without the namespace vars).

I just inject the natvis files to launch.json file (replace the namespace macro correclty) and do no special handling inside my extension. VSCode just use the C++ extension from microsoft to read/use the natvis file, so it is maybe a good idea to file an issue on their bug tracker https://github.com/microsoft/vscode-cpptools/issues . I've read in the past that the natvis file are using a complete different impl. on Linux/Mac as on windows. On windows it works most of the time normally. On my Mac it works partly.

@pktiuk
Copy link

pktiuk commented Aug 6, 2022

@tonka3000

Why do you use only such a basic natvis file in this extension instead of including a proper one from another project? (of course with proper FOSS license)

@Ashark
Copy link

Ashark commented Jul 19, 2024

@tonka3000

Why do you use only such a basic natvis file in this extension instead of including a proper one from another project? (of course with proper FOSS license)

Yeah, I think there would not be a problem to include one file under different license.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants