Qt Group Buys IAR Systems Group

Post by freedomben » Tue, Oct 21, 2025, 1:51 PM UTC

bmitc wrote: post #47

freedomben wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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've only used Qt from Python, but I found that a major downside. Qt wants you to program inside Qt and not within your host language. Take, for example, their approach to Python's asyncio. Instead of integrating with Python's default asyncio, they're writing their own version of it.

Post by rurban » Sat, Oct 25, 2025, 5:34 PM UTC

estimator7292 wrote: post #26

rurban wrote: post #16

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…

Honestly I'd be willing to blame GCC for that one. IME its output is atrocious for embedded stuff. Few optimizations for the chips I use and absolute nonsense assembly trying to emulate CPU instructions GCC doesn't know exist in hardware. Binaries are regularly 3x larger than they should be. It's so awful I had to end up writing my tight loops in straight assembly because GCC couldn't handle incrementing a damn point…