Qt 4.3.0 lots of Bugs!

[VireX]

I supply tons of code examples, only to be said "thats your fault", when its clear as DAY that its a QT bug. I proved to you the bug, by showing you the example that jacek even admited was wrong by Qt to mess the cell widget up. That code would work fine in 4.2.3, what went wrong?

The graphics bug, I cannot post the code, because I dont know whats causing the bug, I told you to try to put a border-image on a complex image, and you will see it yourself, if you don't see it yourself, I'm sorry, but I can't post any code, if I did I would have to post code for 5000 lines or so.

I'm not wasting your time, I'm telling you theres a bug, and telling you exactly how it happened, and explaining why it might be happening, I can't post the code for border-image, because if it's not as simple as I explained to recreate, then it's very difficult for me to find out whats causing it and what "Area" of code to post.

[mm78]

How come I couldn't find a single bug in 4.2.3, yet I can find at least 10 in 4.3.0.... There is obviously a reason for this.

One of the reasons could be bad eyesight. You don't seriously believe that there were no bugs in 4.2.3? Actually, it's not at all impossible that your code worked with 4.2.3 because of bugs in 4.2.3, and that it doesn't work with 4.3.0 because those bugs were fixed. And referring to an earlier post in this thread: such a bug would be an instance of "undocumented feature". Something that wasn't meant to work accidentally works - just by chance. Never ever write code that depends on undocumented features unless you can accept that your code might break in the future.

Also, it's quite obvious that you're capable of reproducing the bugs you're complaining about so you must have some code. Why don't you post your code for us? If you can't even be bothered to post your code then why on earth would we be bothered to write it? After all these are your problems - not ours - and most of us don't get any sort of kick out of helping fussbudgets such as you.

My advice to you is simple: stick to 4.2.3 or post your code. Read this and try out the beta next time. It really isn't that hard nor time consuming to compile Qt. And again, if you can't be bothered why would we?

Edit: How can it be clear as the day that this is a Qt bug, and how come you know how it happened and why it might be happening, when you don't know what is causing it or even which area of your code is triggering it?

[wysota]

My code was not incorrect in 4.2.3, as it worked at that time

If something works, it doesn't mean it's correct.

and you yourself (or perhaps it was jacek cant remember) suggested that I do setItems under the setCellWidget.

So as I said, Jacek pointed out an error in your code, so it was not correct.

I guess you're trying to tell me that trolltech does not know how to use server-side coding or something, because I don't believe CODE looks at time and goes "Oh well I am not going to send an auto-response at this time of night"

No, I'm trying to tell you that auto-response is sent when the message is downloaded from the mail server and not when it is delivered to the mail server. At least it looked like so for every single bug report I posted to Trolltech thus far.

Yes that's true, I compared the 4.2 and 4.3 docs, but for some reason, now, it doesn't work well.. Try it yourself, make a gradient about this size from black to gray, [________]
its a small image, about 100px width by 30px height; ALSO make sure you put a small 1 px border around this image in a light gray color, and make sure the gradient looks like a rounded border-radius box. Now, make a laaaaarge TreeWidget, make it about 100widthX700 height. Now set the border-image on that, border-width 2. Run the program, and you will see how horribly Qt likes to render your gradient.

First of all with Qt 4.3 I wouldn't use an image for a gradient because Qt can make one for me without problems. The behaviour you describe seems perfectly normal. If you stretch an image, it gets distorted. What's so unusual about it? What would you expect it to do?

But perhaps this has something to do with the "experimental DX code" that I read somewhere in the changelogs.

I don't think so.

How many times do I have to explain to you how to reproduce it, have you tried to reproduce it with code? This is an image rendering problem, not a code problem, its a code problem inside Qt not outside.

Don't explain, show the code used to reproduce it so I can see the difference between 4.2.3 and 4.3.0 myself instead of relying on your words.

Yes but in Qt 4.2.3 it did this smoothly, but in 4.3.0, it pixelates it like as if saving your image in a bad quality.

So you agree that it didn't work correctly in Qt 4.2.3 and it does work correctly in Qt 4.3.0? So where is the bug?

No, because if a code works fine in one version, then next version your code is somehow now labeled buggy, that means either the documentation for 4.2.3 was wrong, or 4.3.0 documentation is wrong.

No. Your code was abusing some presumed faulty behaviour.

Because they both dont say anything about how I coded it as being wrong.

Documentation serves as information on how to do things and not how to not do them.

If in 4.2.3 it worked, and 4.3.0 it doesn't it means someone in Qt changed the code for that in a bad way, and downgraded Qt's code for that purpose.

It means that someone changed some code. Nothing more.

I explained to you the problem, you can try it yourself, I can't post code for every time one of my friends comes to me and tells me that Qt is bugged because of whatever reason.

I'm sorry, but now you are rude. I have devoted hundreds of hours of my private time to solve problems people have - yours too. I have written dozens of example applications, tested different solutions to many problems and corrected many incorrect written lines of code. And now you say you can't write a 10 line example to help us isolate your problem? Did anyone force you to look for help here? Did anyone ask you to pay for the help you received? Did anyone expressed any demands to you or any of your associates regarding the code he/she wrote for you regarding the copyright or any form of gratitude? Could we expect less cooperation with you than asking you to describe your problem in a way that seems best for us to understand it?

There is obviously a reason for this.

Sure there is, but different from what seems obvious to you.

[VireX]

When you make a program with 1000s of lines of code, and then switch to 4.3.0 to find half your code broken, anyone with a brain would consider this a bug in 4.3.0 not a bug in 4.2.3. If it worked by chance, why would they need to fix it?

I am not blind, because I know bugs exist in 4.2.3, but I haven't encountered any of them in my experience, because they are very few and rare. I may have encountered one or two, but I fixed them with work-arounds, it wasn't anything that is similar to the bugs in 4.3.0 which I cannot do anything about, because I am powerless, as these fixes or bugs or whatever, are not fixable, and I have tried for several hours.

I will test any beta, to help out. But I am not going to test some code thats about 5 folders with 30 pieces of code each, and compile that, when i know that has problems in the past. I hate compiling other people's large code, because it always has tons of compiler errors and it's undocumented. And it's incredibly time consuming. You get me the dlls and libs in mingw form, and I'll test them for you any time you want. But I don't see why Qt would force people to compile it themselves when Qt can easily compile it themselves and put a small download link of zip, I dont need an installer either. I don't give my beta programs to my clients as SOurce code... I give them a working compilable version of my program.

I didn't add any feature to my program that was UNDOCUMENTED, sorting is quite well documented, and so is setCellWidget, I see no message such as "If you use sorting, don't use cellwidgets, because your buttons may disappear" and I don't see any message such in border-image documentation about "In qt 4.3.0, we changed some things so that some border images may become pixelated and blurry, to fix this do this this and that.", it worked fine in 4.2.3, why change the way it renders border-image??

It's clear as day it's a Qt bug, because it worked in 4.2.3, and it stopped working in 4.3.0, even though by the documentation I followed, my methods are correct. If they are wrong, then why wasn't a proper method mentioned in the docs of those functions?

I bothered enough to post tons of code for you to try, I even typed many paragraphs explaining how you can recreate it. I also told you other information as to what might be causing it, but I cannot pinpoint it since I do not have the Qt source in front of me or no my way around it. That is why I won't post code, because it is unrelated to my code.

EDIT @wysota:

First of all with Qt 4.3 I wouldn't use an image for a gradient because Qt can make one for me without problems. The behaviour you describe seems perfectly normal. If you stretch an image, it gets distorted. What's so unusual about it? What would you expect it to do?

Yes, but why would I type 10 lines to make gradients + a nice rounder border, when I can just do border-image: url() ? If I stretch an image it will get distorted you are correct sir, but Qt 4.2.3 had code that enhanced rendering, so that when you do stretch it, it stretches it appropriately, and makes it look perfect. While in 4.3.0, someone removed that code so that it stretches it in a bad pixelated way.

[jacek]

How come I couldn't find a single bug in 4.2.3, yet I can find at least 10 in 4.3.0

If you have a version number x.y.z, then the higher x and y the more features given software contains, the higher z the less bugs. If you want to compare number of bugs, compare 4.3.0 with 4.2.0.

[VireX]

Exactly, you're absolutely right jacek, but people here are telling me that 4.3.0 has less bugs than 4.2.3.

[VireX]

So you agree that it didn't work correctly in Qt 4.2.3 and it does work correctly in Qt 4.3.0? So where is the bug?

No, I said it worked well in 4.2.3, and bad in 4.3.0... Why would they fix what was perfect in 4.2.3?

No. Your code was abusing some presumed faulty behaviour.

That may be the case in many places. Not in this situation. I wasn't abusing anything when i used border-image, nor when I sorted via sortItems on a QTableWidgetItem, along with a cellWidget in same cell, you would expect the behavior of 4.2.3, not the behavior of 4.3.0, are you sure disappearing buttons in 4.3, is my fault, I don't think i put hide() or switchButtonPlaces() anywhere.

I'm sorry, but now you are rude. I have devoted hundreds of hours of my private time to solve problems people have - yours too.

I know, you are a great person and a pillar of the Qt community, and I thank you for everytime you have helped me and others in the past. But you misread my quote, I never said your work wasn't appreciated, nor did I say, I am too lazy to post code, I told you I cannot post code for something that I dont know what the problem is. I can post you thousands of lines of code, but I doubt you will find it in there? Border-Image bug is not something I can post code for, if you want the code here it is:
border-image: url(img/button.png) 5;
border-width: 5;
Is this the code you wanted? That's the only way I can reproduce it for you... I didn't do anything regarding image manipulation to cause this, this is completely based off of inner-source of Qt, not my source.
The other Qt bug, for cellwidgets, I told you, i can't reproduce it, but in the sample app was the only way to reproduce it, even when I do Jacek's fix, it doesn't help. When you change button-text and cellitem text again, and sort button is clicked again, the bug reappears and buttons start disappearing on random, I cannot know exactly why it happens. If I find some other better way to reproduce it, i'll give it to you, but I cannot at the moment.

[wysota]

No, I said it worked well in 4.2.3, and bad in 4.3.0...

Which one? You have mentioned more than one unexpected behaviour here.

I wasn't abusing anything when i used border-image,

I think you have.

nor when I sorted via sortItems on a QTableWidgetItem, along with a cellWidget in same cell

I won't argue with that, I only have the release candidate version, so I can't test it, but Jacek seems to agree that there's a bug here, so I won't say otherwise.

I told you I cannot post code for something that I dont know what the problem is.

We're not asking you to reproduce the problem but to reproduce the result using code presumed incorrect. We can't test your code without seeing it.

I can post you thousands of lines of code, but I doubt you will find it in there?

I won't debug your application I can help you find a solution to a function that doesn't work as expected, but I need to have it.

Border-Image bug is not something I can post code for,

Why not?

if you want the code here it is:
border-image: url(img/button.png) 5;
border-width: 5;
Is this the code you wanted? That's the only way I can reproduce it for you...

But does it really reproduce the error?

Try this:

#include <QApplication>
#include <QPushButton>
 
int main(int argc, char **agrv){
  QApplication app(argc, argv);
  QPushButton bt("Testing");
  bt.setStyleSheet("border-image: url(img/button.png) 5; border-width: 5;");
  bt.show();
  return app.exec();
}

#include <QApplication>
#include <QPushButton>

int main(int argc, char **agrv){
  QApplication app(argc, argv);
  QPushButton bt("Testing");
  bt.setStyleSheet("border-image: url(img/button.png) 5; border-width: 5;");
  bt.show();
  return app.exec();
}

To copy to clipboard, switch view to plain text mode 

Does this yield a correct result in 4.2 but not in 4.3?

[mm78]

When you make a program with 1000s of lines of code, and then switch to 4.3.0 to find half your code broken, anyone with a brain would consider this a bug in 4.3.0 not a bug in 4.2.3.

Did you ever consider that this in fact might be caused by bugs in your code?

If it worked by chance, why would they need to fix it?

Because it wasn't supposed or expected to work? Now I'm not talking about the feature in general, but your way of using it.

I am not blind, because I know bugs exist in 4.2.3, but I haven't encountered any of them in my experience, because they are very few and rare.

They are not few and rare. Do a search on Tasktracker, or scan the change log for 4.3.0 for the word "bug". There were plenty of bugs in 4.2.3. There are bugs in 4.3.0 too, and their nature is not different from those in 4.2.3.

I may have encountered one or two, but I fixed them with work-arounds...

Maybe your problems are caused by these work-arounds?

I will test any beta, to help out. But I am not going to test some code thats about 5 folders with 30 pieces of code each, and compile that, when i know that has problems in the past. I hate compiling other people's large code, because it always has tons of compiler errors and it's undocumented. And it's incredibly time consuming.

Come on! You download the source, then run configure and make. It's quite easy. If you're on a slow computer it takes some time, but just leave it over night. And it IS documented. You don't have to test the Qt code either. All you need to test is your application. If you did this when the beta was released and had reported your problems to Trolltech then, they would have had 3 months to investigate your problems.

I don't give my beta programs to my clients as SOurce code...

I don't know who your clients are. Are they software developers? Can you expect them to know how to use a compiler? Can Trolltech expect that their customers know how to use a compiler? Actually you don't even need to know how to use a compiler, all you need to do is run configure and make.

I didn't add any feature to my program that was UNDOCUMENTED, sorting is quite well documented, and so is setCellWidget, I see no message such as "If you use sorting, don't use cellwidgets, because your buttons may disappear"...

If the documentation said that it would be documented. It's when the documentation doesn't say anything that it's called undocumented. And I'm not talking about general features, but about which functions should be called when, with what arguments and what kind of restrictions there are, and so on.

I bothered enough to post tons of code for you to try, I even typed many paragraphs explaining how you can recreate it.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to sit down and write code based on your explanation to find the cause of your problems. How many lines of code would I have to write? 5000? I suspect no one else is going to do that either, and why should we when you don't?

[jacek]

Exactly, you're absolutely right jacek, but people here are telling me that 4.3.0 has less bugs than 4.2.3.

Where? Nobody said that there are no bugs in 4.3.0. We just want to verify that what you have encountered are really Qt bugs, because that's the first step in getting them fixed. It seems that you are more interested in complaining than in resolving issues.

[VireX]

Exactly, I can't tell you whats causing the problem so dont bother typing 5000 lines, but I explained what could be causing the code, and if you wanted you can try some code for 5 minutes and maybe u might reproduce it. Quite frankly I expected tons of people on this forum to see this bug, since I'm sure border-image is used quite frequently. I didn't code anything to make border-image not work... :S. I even isolated the code, so that I can eliminate any "CSS conflicts" that may be causing the problem but its not that either. I cannot tell you whats wrong, except of what I explained, I thought from my explanation you may be able to say "well maybe you forgot to code ____ along with border-image" and I would go "oooh im so sorry i forgot", but it doesn't seem like that kind of a simple problem, it seems more like a bug in qt.

I didn't make any workarounds that may cause trouble, example, I had a bug where sometimes when you delete an item from a treewidget, the item leaves a graphical representation of it, and doesn't update the widget WM_Paint or something, but after changing some of the delete code, it worked fine. Not exactly a work around, just me using an improper way of coding showing a bug in Qt... The bug does exist, but it can be fixed by your own coding, as is the bugs in this thread. The bug can be fixed, but in certain situations it shows its ugly head. I just can't figure out what situation it is, which is why i posted the bug here first before reporting to task tracker and wasting Qt developer's time. To confirm if its a bug, and so far, I think I have confirmed it, since its not a problem that someone can easily fix.

I am not interested in complaining, I want to resolve these problems as fast as possible. But even when I explain the bug countless times, no one can come up with an idea to reproduce it, everyone seems more interested in proving to me that its not a Qt bug and its my fault. I can't reproduce it myself either, but it happens in my program for some reason, and I dont know what part or AREA is causing it...it's completely a mystery. But doesn't mean it's my fault, even if I did something that caused it, it is still something that Qt made possible thru version 4.3.0. Me coding it wrong, just helped prove a bug in Qt exists thats all.

[wysota]

but I explained what could be causing the code

No, you didn't. You said Qt is buggy...

and if you wanted you can try some code for 5 minutes and maybe u might reproduce it.

Why don't you code for 5 minutes and reproduce the bug so that we could verify that?

Quite frankly I expected tons of people on this forum to see this bug, since I'm sure border-image is used quite frequently.

Maybe it works for them as expected...

I thought from my explanation you may be able to say "well maybe you forgot to code ____ along with border-image" and I would go "oooh im so sorry i forgot"

Maybe you forgot to read in the documentation that border-image takes parameters stating what to do with the centre image in horizontal and vertical directions?

As you can see here:


The gradient in the biggest button is stretched. The image is from Qt 4.2 and I assume you're facing the same behaviour - stretched centre image. So it seems Qt 4.2 used to work exactly the same as Qt 4.3

but it doesn't seem like that kind of a simple problem, it seems more like a bug in qt.

No, I won't repeat myself again

Edit: Here is a screenshot of two apps, one running 4.2.3 and one running 4.3.0rc1. They look pretty simmilar to me.

[VireX]

Ok, you kept asking why I cant reproduce it, well because I said I cannot reproduce it, well now I can, and you know why I couldn't reproduce the bug? because I was accidently using the 4.2.3 DLLs since they are in my PATH variable, and I forgot to put the 4.3.0 DLLs into my other folder which has the "reproducing" files. So yes it is definitely because of 4.3.0 changes. And DEFINITELY not my code.

To prove it, heres some CODE that you finally wanted. In addition some scr shots.

#include <QtGui>
 
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    app.setStyle(QApplication::setStyle("Plastique")); // not related to bug prolly
QDialog* qddd;
    qddd = new QDialog;
    QPushButton* qb = new QPushButton("Test", qddd);
    qb->setMinimumSize(QSize(62, 47));
    qb->setMaximumSize(QSize(62, 47));
    qb->setStyleSheet("border-image: url(test.png) 2;\
    border-width: 2;");
    qddd->show();
    return app.exec();
}

#include <QtGui>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    app.setStyle(QApplication::setStyle("Plastique")); // not related to bug prolly
QDialog* qddd;
    qddd = new QDialog;
    QPushButton* qb = new QPushButton("Test", qddd);
    qb->setMinimumSize(QSize(62, 47));
    qb->setMaximumSize(QSize(62, 47));
    qb->setStyleSheet("border-image: url(test.png) 2;\
    border-width: 2;");
    qddd->show();
    return app.exec();
}

To copy to clipboard, switch view to plain text mode 

http://img385.imageshack.us/img385/641/testwc7.png
<--- Save this image as a png in your test folder!!!! (test.png dont forget to rename)

Now this is the undeniable proof, please prove me wrong now that this is not a Qt bug.

[Methedrine]

About your problem with disappearing QPushButtons when sorting your table, I can confirm that there are 2 bugs. Calling sort() after adding all items is not a bug, though. It's as recommended in the documentation:

If you want to set several items of a particular row (say, by calling setItem() in a loop), you may want to turn off sorting before doing so, and turn it back on afterwards; this will allow you to use the same row argument for all items in the same row (i.e. setItem() will not move the row).

Here is the code I used for spotting and reproducing your problem:

#include <QtGui>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    QTableWidget* qt = new QTableWidget;
    qt->verticalHeader()->setVisible(false);
    qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
    qt->setRowCount(75);
    qt->setColumnCount(1);
    QTableWidgetItem *__colItem = new QTableWidgetItem();
    __colItem->setText(QApplication::translate("t", "test", 0, QApplication::UnicodeUTF8));
    qt->setHorizontalHeaderItem(0, __colItem);
    for(int i = 0; i < 75; i++){
     qt->setCellWidget(i, 0, new QPushButton("ff"));
     qt->setItem(i, 0, new QTableWidgetItem(QString("Ebeeef%1").arg(i)));
    }
    qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);
    qt->show();
    return app.exec();
}

#include <QtGui>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    QTableWidget* qt = new QTableWidget;
    qt->verticalHeader()->setVisible(false);
    qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
    qt->setRowCount(75);
    qt->setColumnCount(1);
    QTableWidgetItem *__colItem = new QTableWidgetItem();
    __colItem->setText(QApplication::translate("t", "test", 0, QApplication::UnicodeUTF8));
    qt->setHorizontalHeaderItem(0, __colItem);
    for(int i = 0; i < 75; i++){
     qt->setCellWidget(i, 0, new QPushButton("ff"));
     qt->setItem(i, 0, new QTableWidgetItem(QString("Ebeeef%1").arg(i)));
    }
    qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);
    qt->show();
    return app.exec();
}

To copy to clipboard, switch view to plain text mode 

For some weird reason, when sorting the list ascending, there is exactly one pushbutton (always the same) not displaying. When sorting descending, all show up. That bug is new in Qt 4.3.0, didnt have 4.2.3 at hand on this machine, but it works in 4.2.2.

Did you report that as a bug already or should I submit it to TrollTech's task tracker?

[VireX]

They gave me a tracker ID: #166442, said they got it, but I dont see it on tasktracker, says that ID doesn't exist, and not sure if I explained it correctly.

Methedrine, in my code at the moment, I do this:

setSortingEnabled(false);
additemsAndcellWidgets();
setSortingEnabled(true);
sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);

This is my code at the moment, and it still has problems, so the "recommendation" you told me, I knew this already, and it doesn't help. It does help with the "initial" showing of the items, but once a user clicks the Header section to sort again, the bug reappears!!

Here's the code to reproduce now:

#include <QtGui>
 
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    QTableWidget* qt = new QTableWidget;
    qt->verticalHeader()->setVisible(false);
    qt->setRowCount(75);
    qt->setColumnCount(2);
    qt->setSortingEnabled(false);
    /*qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
    qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);*/
    QTableWidgetItem *__colItem = new QTableWidgetItem();
    __colItem->setText(QApplication::translate("t", "test", 0, QApplication::UnicodeUTF8));
    qt->setHorizontalHeaderItem(0, __colItem);
    QTableWidgetItem* ax[75];
    for(int i = 0; i < 75; i++){
     ax[i] = new QTableWidgetItem(QString("Ebeeef%1").arg(i));
     qt->setItem(i, 0, ax[i]);
     qt->setCellWidget(ax[i]->row(), 0, new QPushButton(QString("Ebeeef%1").arg(i)));
    }
    qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);
    qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
    qt->show();
    return app.exec();
}

#include <QtGui>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    QTableWidget* qt = new QTableWidget;
    qt->verticalHeader()->setVisible(false);
    qt->setRowCount(75);
    qt->setColumnCount(2);
    qt->setSortingEnabled(false);
    /*qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
    qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);*/
    QTableWidgetItem *__colItem = new QTableWidgetItem();
    __colItem->setText(QApplication::translate("t", "test", 0, QApplication::UnicodeUTF8));
    qt->setHorizontalHeaderItem(0, __colItem);
    QTableWidgetItem* ax[75];
    for(int i = 0; i < 75; i++){
     ax[i] = new QTableWidgetItem(QString("Ebeeef%1").arg(i));
     qt->setItem(i, 0, ax[i]);
     qt->setCellWidget(ax[i]->row(), 0, new QPushButton(QString("Ebeeef%1").arg(i)));
    }
    qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);
    qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
    qt->show();
    return app.exec();
}

To copy to clipboard, switch view to plain text mode 

EDIT: I CHANGED THE CODE. Here's what I discovered:
1) If you do:
qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);
Your code will instantly show the missing buttons bug.
If you do:
qt->sortItems(0, Qt::AscendingOrder);
qt->setSortingEnabled(true);
Your code will only show the bug if you click the HEADERVIEW to sort again (eg. descending).
2) ax[i]->row(); doesn't make a difference.

[Methedrine]

They gave me a tracker ID: #166442, said they got it, but I dont see it on tasktracker, says that ID doesn't exist, and not sure if I explained it correctly.

Ok, I didn't find it yet either, but I'll give them a few more days.

This is my code at the moment, and it still has problems, so the "recommendation" you told me, I knew this already, and it doesn't help. It does help with the "initial" showing of the items, but once a user clicks the Header section to sort again, the bug reappears!!

Do setCellWidget before doing setCellItem and you'll notice that there is (at least in my case) only one button missing.

[wysota]

Hmm... for me the image seems to look fine (4.3rc1, based on the fact there was no rc2 I assume that's what became 4.3.0) ... Oh, and I corrected your code a bit

#include <QtGui>
 
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    app.setStyle(QApplication::setStyle("Plastique")); // not related to bug prolly
    QPushButton qb("Test");
    qb.setFixedSize(62, 47);
    //qb.setSizePolicy(QSizePolicy::Expanding, QSizePolicy::Expanding);
    qb.setStyleSheet("border-image: url(test.png) 2;\
    border-width: 2;");
    qb.show();
    return app.exec();
}

#include <QtGui>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    app.setStyle(QApplication::setStyle("Plastique")); // not related to bug prolly
    QPushButton qb("Test");
    qb.setFixedSize(62, 47);
    //qb.setSizePolicy(QSizePolicy::Expanding, QSizePolicy::Expanding);
    qb.setStyleSheet("border-image: url(test.png) 2;\
    border-width: 2;");
    qb.show();
    return app.exec();
}

To copy to clipboard, switch view to plain text mode 

Just tell me... what's the point of using border-image if your button has a fixed size?

They gave me a tracker ID: #166442, said they got it, but I dont see it on tasktracker, says that ID doesn't exist, and not sure if I explained it correctly.

That's the autoreply email probably.

[VireX]

mm, try downloading 4.3.0 Mingw compiled version (make sure you're using Windows XP). Maybe difference is the mingw stuff?

I used border-image, because background-image on a pushbutton has more bugs.

I'm reporting this bug, it's definitely a bug...

[wysota]

Tough luck, I don't have WindowsXP. But look - now you are blaming the compiler

I used border-image, because background-image on a pushbutton has more bugs.

I didn't say anything about using background-image. By the way, what are these bugs you mention?

I'm reporting this bug, it's definitely a bug...

Lol... Be my guest although there is a chance they won't reproduce it either

[high_flyer]

I fully agree with Methedrine.
From the start, your tone is complaintative and arrogant.
I have used Qt since version 2.3, and came across things that MIGHT be bugs VERY seldom.
Qt is meanwhile a very mature kit, and the likelihood that you stumble on a bug (or so many as you claim) is highly unlikely, specially, since from your own code it is evident, that you are no C++ guru, and many trolls are.
So, first, my advice to you, change your attitude, it is not good for your blood pressure and ulcerous.
Second, a bug is only then a bug when you use a CORRECT code, in the way it was supposed to be used, and then the effect is not the documented/expected effect.
Since you did not provide such reproduced bug behaviour code, you can't claim bug, and only then you might claim it a bug, and even then you should use "maybe", and not that assertive and frankly irritating tone.

And - your tone is not in place even if you were fully right from the start.
As long as you are not paying for the product, there is no room for such complaintative tone.

Don't get me wrong.
Its not that we are not interested to know of new bugs - quite the contrary.
But instead of so many words and posts that actually bring nothing, just post a short post with bug description and example code, that reproduced what you think is a bug.
No need to use degrading and arrogant language.