> Unfortunately that means there are now 4 completely separate UI stacks
> to maintain in Qt - widgets,
> QGraphicsView, the web and QtQuick v2. I wonder if they could be
> harmonized at all?
> We can use QML to describe UIs in all four.
True - but I'm thinking more about the implementation. If someone adds
a new feature to a QtWidgets control for example, how much extra work
is it usually to implement that for QtQuick controls as well?
On 21 April 2014 20:49, Steve Gold <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been reading the discussions about Qt’s future and strongly feel that
> it's full of promise. Last year I used a different application framework but
> the company went bankrupt without notifying its users. I then tried several
> other frameworks but wasn’t happy with any of them. Then I came across
> Cosos2d-x and Qt and briefly tried both. I quickly came to the conclusion
> and that I was able to use C++ if I needed to access existing libraries or
> required critical performance. IMHO, this one-two punch in some ways sets Qt
> above the fray and enable developers to create and deploy a wide range of
> applications, including complex and highy performant ones. QML can be used
> when it is appropriate and C++ can be used when it is appropriate.
> When I last counted the QML types and C++ classes I found that the C++
> classed outnumbered the QML typed by approximately 3:1. I’m certainly not
> suggesting that the ratio be close to 1:1 but there is some room here for
> improvement. I like that many of the new features of Qt 5.3 and some of its
> immediate predecessors allow users to access functionality in C++ or QML and
> hope that this trend continues. There are certainly several aspects of Qt
> that can be improved, like the Qt Creator editor for one, but Qt is an open
> source project and everyone has an opportunity to contribute by comments,
> suggestions or even code.
> BTW, I agree with the statement "I do not really care about .ui file
> support." I would, however, like to see some improvement in the Qt Creator
> design functionality, especially since the older Qt Designer appears to have
> more capability than the newer Qt Quick Designer. However, I personally
> disagree that "100% C++ GUI is fine." QML provides a MUCH better vehicle for
> GUI than C++ and after using C++ and Java for many years I can see
> tremendous benefit in QML. If someone wants to spend the time and effort to
> create GUIs in C++, then I wish him or her luck. I've experienced some pain
> with this in the past and I don't want to do it again. It's just my
> preference and may not be right for everyone.
> To Qt's bright future,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ***@rpzdesign.com
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2014 12:55 PM
> To: Thiago Macieira ; ***@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] Question about Qt's future
> I really appreciate your and Intel's participation in the open source Qt
> I think you misunderstood what I was talking about and forcefully
> rejected that which I did not ask.
> I want the "pattern" brought forward, but we should not try to bring the
> code forward. Let sleeping dogs lie.
> After reading these:
> What I think would be a solution is to create a starting point
> where Qt Widget 2.0 development could begin anew again based on the
> QQuickPaintedItem class.
> I think the notion of a Window with child custom controls is not too far
> My suggestion is basically to provide an early off ramp for QQuickWindow
> to allow for 100% C++ projects.
> This may even serve as the foundation for custom controls in QML as
> well, don't know enough right now to be dangerous.
> It would definitely provide current Qt Widget users a sense of ease
> that the Widget option is still available even though QtQuickWindow is
> the future focus.
> QML and QTWidget would then both use the same dual GUI/render thread
> foundation, but it would be good to have an early C++ jumping off point
> for QQuickWindow based projects.
> I do not really care about .ui file support. For all I can see, 100%
> C++ GUI is fine.
> What do you think?
> On 4/21/2014 12:19 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> Em seg 21 abr 2014, às 10:59:43, ***@rpzdesign.com escreveu:
>>> Can Qt Widgets design pattern be brought forward using the same OpenGL
>>> that QML uses to instantiate controls?
>> Short answer: no.
>> Long answer: if you want it working in other platforms, without glitches
>> regressions, the effort required for this is enormous. It basically
>> rewriting all or almost all widgets from scratch so that they work in a
>> retained-mode OpenGL scene graph, instead of imperative-mode raster buffer
>> painting. It's a complete paradigm change.
>> Since this requires a rewrite, instead of doing it in QtWidgets and
>> regressions that users will not accept, the idea was instead to do it in a
>> different module, one where we can experiment and at the same time clean
>> some of the mistakes that exist in QtWidgets and can't be cleaned up
>> annoying someone.
>> That's the Qt Quick Components.
> Development mailing list
> Development mailing list