41–50 of 53 posts
I'm familiar with the normal MSVC/Clang/GCC/EDG C++ compilers, but not IAR's. They seem to make C++ compilers for embedded systems. Does anyone know if these are their own, or based on something like Clang? Their supported standards list 'libc++' [1] which implies LLVM and potentially Clang. I could not find info online. "IAR Embedded Workbench C++ is dialectal and contains some features not part of standard C++." [2…
I'm not sure there's much overlap in use cases, considering the two very separate classes of 'embedded'; Qt is used on Linux capable devices and IAR is MCUs why would Qt want to customize a compiler when they still need to support llvm/gcc/msvc?
My first thought is that they can extend Qt's test library to also manage test data across a pipe to the embedded processor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everytime a QT post comes someone bitch about the licensing model. And every time I google and try understand what is wrong with the licensing model. And everytime I end up confused about it. Could you kindly ELI5 me what is wrong with QT licensing model?
If you get confused by it then that's all that needs to be said. The rest has been discussed over and over. I've dropped Qt for other front-end tech and I'm happier now.
What was painful about switching to web tech for UI? I've proposed it at work a few times for exactly the same reasons: get away from Qt and ease of finding developers. Since our GUIs all run on Linux (we usually do the realtime stuff on an external ARM processor) it seemed like an easy transition, but I've been shot down every time.
Would be nice to hear what the downsides are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern c++ does some things better than qt, others it is still worse. Just unique ptr is better than qt's parent-child object model (memory management only, parent child is useful for other things)
It kind of drives me crazy trying to have a modern C++ codebase which uses smart pointers everywhere, yet every touch point with Qt involves manually allocating memory and passing the pointers into some magical Qt blackbox which hopefully frees the memory when appropriate.
I once tried to get a IAR C++ embedded codebase to compile with g++ and it's stdlib on a very small chip. It eventually compiled but never worked. I'll have to rewrite it in C instead. There were many hacks, like filling the stack with sentinels to detect it at run-time. The linker script was horrible. Rewrote everything from scratch. The resulting code was many KB too large for the available space, it would have nee…
Methinks you were targeting some wierd-ish ISA that had near/far addressing and a larger memory space than the but core could address directly. Those have all sorts of quirks needed to make code work properly, quirks GCC probably never bothered to implement or optimize for. It's also probably why it never worked. Oh... you have a pointer? That's nice, but this is a near pointer and the data is outside of how much it…
I'm pretty sure it's the stdlib, IO probably, which is only needed for debugging anyway.
I have a C++ seasoned colleague who says that It framework went behind the current C++ standard, however I remember Qt Framework much cleaner than C++ itself (by making a sort of a enhanced subset), and would prefer use it. What are your opinions?
Take this with a grain of salt because it's been about 10 years since I slung serious C++. Just my opinion of course, but if you go all-in with the Qt libraries, it's a lot better (and safer). Most people only think about Qt as a GUI framework, but it's much, much more than that. It's a very rich set of libraries that do way more than just UI. We actually used Qt for our server too! So I agree with you, Qt tends to b…
I'm familiar with the normal MSVC/Clang/GCC/EDG C++ compilers, but not IAR's. They seem to make C++ compilers for embedded systems. Does anyone know if these are their own, or based on something like Clang? Their supported standards list 'libc++' [1] which implies LLVM and potentially Clang. I could not find info online. "IAR Embedded Workbench C++ is dialectal and contains some features not part of standard C++." [2…
https://wiki.qt.io/C%2B%2B_reflection_(P2996)_and_moc
C++ Builder still has a special place on my heart, Microsoft has never managed to create something as good on their C++ stack for doing GUI applications in C+*, there is nothing visual about Visual C++, unfortunely they seem not able to deliver anything better than MFC.
C++/CLI never had the same access to the GUI tooling used by VB and C#, C++/CX got sabotaged by an internal group that rather write IDL files in Notepad and push that experience to everyone, than caring about paying customers.
Regarding IAR, maybe it is a way to solidify their offering, and counter advances from Android, Electron and Flutter being adopted on the same industries.
Two companies with horrendous licensing methods and prices. They'll do great together.
Everytime a QT post comes someone bitch about the licensing model. And every time I google and try understand what is wrong with the licensing model. And everytime I end up confused about it. Could you kindly ELI5 me what is wrong with QT licensing model?
Qt licensing is rather easy to understand.
Don't want to pay Qt? Then get the same money yourself, zero.
Want to get paid while selling a product based on Qt? Give something to Qt.