71–79 of 79 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Electron does allow to use c++, what make QT c++ more practical for business logic?
The things that are missing in standard C++: Unicode, SQL, filesystem (kind of fixed in C++20 or so), serialization, network protocols, JSON, XML, an event loop(!), signals and slots, a thread pool, compiled-in resources, runtime plugin support, etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The things that are missing in standard C++: Unicode, SQL, filesystem (kind of fixed in C++20 or so), serialization, network protocols, JSON, XML, an event loop(!), signals and slots, a thread pool, compiled-in resources, runtime plugin support, etc
Thanks for exemplifying! Nit: filesystem is fixed in C++17.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read somewhere a few months back that qt is dropping qmake in favour of cmake in the medium term. And everyone rejoiced.
That's a step in the right direction. The next thing would be to drop the compiler extensions (signal/slots macros) in favor of modern C++.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read somewhere a few months back that qt is dropping qmake in favour of cmake in the medium term. And everyone rejoiced.
That's a step in the right direction. The next thing would be to drop the compiler extensions (signal/slots macros) in favor of modern C++.
What are the technical reasons to prefer Qt over JavaFX[1]? Even Bitwig Studio, which is a C++ audio application, went with JavaFX for its cross-platform UI. It can also be written in React-like declarative style[2], which is much easier to maintain. [1] https://openjfx.io/ [2] https://github.com/cljfx/cljfx
No Oracle dependencies?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaFX
OpenJDK is now the 'official' JDK and reference implementation with Oracle making proprietary forks for their own customers, supported on their own timelines.
Java is actually doing some really interesting things since Java 9, with modular runtimes, pluggable garbage collectors, new compilers (Graal) and the Clojure crowd are being swept along with it simply by stint of being on the JVM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I read somewhere a few months back that qt is dropping qmake in favour of cmake in the medium term. And everyone rejoiced.
That's a step in the right direction. The next thing would be to drop the compiler extensions (signal/slots macros) in favor of modern C++.
I've been getting more and more interested with qt development. As a linux user, I'm exhausted from the bloat and cycle stealing electron apps ( with VSCode being a notable exception to this rule). But more recently, the idea of writing one app in Qt, running it everywhere between Android, a Librem 5, and desktop platfoms is really exciting.
That was the main idea behind Pyre-Qt, but dynamic media resizing is not well supported in Qt unless you pull in a web view (at which point you've recreated Electron). https://pyre.chat One fork of Pyre does this using a web view, and it fixes the media scaling bug, but what is the advantage over Signal Desktop at that point (besides being a tray icon & having native integration)? Edit: Capitalization
If you were to make a list, building the damn thing would probably come last. Go to the store on your favorite platform, search "The Qt Company" and try some of their demo apps. It's all complete dog. Looks terrible, behaves worse. It's like Flutter except with 1/100th of the developer firepower to make sure it behaves natively. My personal favorite is the input controls. They haven't freaking implemented copy and pa…
What are you talking about? Qt Widgets and Qt Quick Controls (QML) have always supported copy and paste.