release

I ran my project in release mode and I had no problem. and than I changed the mode to debug mode and I have an error "debug assertion failed". That's the code that caused it: QXmlStreamReader* xmlReader = new QXmlStreamReader(xmlFile); xmlReader->readNextStartElement(); QXmlStreamAttributes attributes; attributes = xmlReader->attributes(); cout << (attributes.value("name").toString().toStdString()); After this cout line I had the error massage. What can be the difference between the modes that caused the difference? I want to know what I need to change for running the project in debug mode.

I'm trying to do a similar thing to this: Creating GitHub repository with only a subset of a local repository's history I currently have all my commits on master and now I want to make a branch called release that only has a single commit of all past commits and no history of the old commits. I tried using the method in that link but doing so caused any further merges into release to not merge automatically, which is somewhat annoying. (The error it gives is Squash commit -- not updating HEAD. Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.) Is there a different way of doing

Looking at: https://help.github.com/articles/about-releases/ it looks like this is specific to github, and not a general git feature. My usage is, from my perspective, no different than branching. That is, branch x is just a marker. Maybe bug fixes, maybe feature added, whatever, maybe experimental. Granted, I'm a very light user of git, and don't use branching, nor merging, to their full potential. This feature seems totally useless in relation to jitpack. And, yet, seems crucial to how jitpack operates. Why? As I understand jitpack, a release is created on a repo, and then, automagically, a

What is the difference between these two code snippets: object = nil; [object release] Vs [object release]; object = nil; which is the best practice ? object = nil; [object release] Don't do that. You are sending a release message on a nil object that will just do nothing. But the object that was referenced by your object is still in memory because it has never received a release message. [object release]; object = nil; Here you release the object, and for convenience and security, you set nil to its reference. So you can call (by mistake of course :-) ) any method on that object and the app

We just started using Visual Studio Release Management for one of our projects, and we're already having some problems with how we are doing things. For now, we've created a single release stage, which is responsible for deploying our build artifacts to a dedicated virtual machine for testing. We intend to use this machine to run our integration tests later on. Right now, we have a gated checkin build process: each checkin fires all the unit tests and we configured the release trigger to happen on this build also. At first, it seemed plausible that, after each checkin, the project was deployed

https://blog.csdn.net/SoaringLee_fighting/article/details/78375085 来源： https://www.cnblogs.com/Stephen-Qin/p/11869468.html