[Development] Crazy Idea

Sun Oct 23 03:32:44 CEST 2011

Any more feedback from anyone? The current situation seems to support a more
traditional web framework more.

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Dhaivat Pandya <dhaivatpandya at gmail.com>wrote:

> To be honest, I've never used Wt (I have gone over the docs, and written a
> few small applications).
>
> If it is possible to do all of that, I would agree to it. However, I would
> still like to see (and probably so would others before we move forward),
> what more people think of this.
>
> Something like Wt (desktop development on the web, cross compilation) or a
> traditional web framework based on Qt and C++.
> So, feedback would be good.
>
> If someone can start a poll, that would be even better.
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles <
> pgquiles at elpauer.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Have you ever used Wt?
>>
>> It does everything you say it's difficult.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Dhaivat Pandya <dhaivatpandya at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Here's my stance on that.
>>> If it is possible to keep the ability to write Javascript for custom UI
>>> widgets (or, C++ that generates a custom Javascript widget), I am for this.
>>> If not, it would very difficult to produce web apps that have some special
>>> "pizazz".
>>>
>>> Web development interfaces are quite different from desktop interfaces
>>> because
>>>
>>>    - There are a ton of different browsers, mobile, web, etc.
>>>    - All kinds of technologies one has to fix up
>>>
>>> Also, if that is done, all the existing code for Javascript (such as
>>> jQuery and the likes) cannot be used, unless the cross compiled C++ can work
>>> with existing Javascript. If that is possible (as I mentioned), I'm totally
>>> in for this idea, but, IMO, that is a difficult thing to accomplish.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles <
>>> pgquiles at elpauer.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Dhaivat Pandya <
>>>> dhaivatpandya at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Okay, so, people do want this to happen. So, the first things we should
>>>>> decide would be what features/ideas one would need. I say:
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, IMHO, if we do make it a QPA by just changing the backend, that
>>>>> would be exactly like Wt.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which is exactly what I'd like to see.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not asking for a web framework/library based on Qt, but for a new
>>>> target for Qt: instead of compiling for Windows, Linux, Symbian or MeeGo, I
>>>> would choose "cross-compile for web". The end result would be a FastCGI
>>>> module, or a single executable which embeds its own web server (exactly like
>>>> in Qt).
>>>>
>>>> Emweb has put a lot of thought into Wt, really.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, even though desktop apps have been written like this for a very
>>>>> long time, webapps (again, IMHO) are better arranged as MVC.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Templates
>>>>> 2) MVC properly done
>>>>> 3) Some type of scaffolding script
>>>>> 4) The core needs to be extremely fast and async
>>>>> 5) Database requests are shifted off to another thread, etc. This is
>>>>> not possible (well, it is, but, not very useful) in languages such as
>>>>> Python, PHP, Ruby since they all use green threading, which works, but,
>>>>> isn't quite as fast.
>>>>> 6) Crash support, if something crashes, don't give a crazy error to the
>>>>> user, figure out where it crashed, write to logs, and the web developer uses
>>>>> an error page. Figuring out where it crashed is mostly where the work is
>>>>> done.
>>>>> 7) Qt libraries are used as much as possible
>>>>> 8) (this one needs community support to happen) Relation to scripting
>>>>> languages, such as Javascript, Lua, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I think there have been several projects trying that:
>>>>
>>>> Creole ( http://blogs.kde.org/node/3707 )
>>>> QtWui ( http://qtwui.sourceforge.net/ )
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> I want write once, compile everywhere. Even if that means having three
>>>> "different" UIs (desktop, mobile, web), it would be a wonderful feature. See
>>>> Gtk+ HTML5 backend.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  2011/10/22 Pau Garcia i Quiles <pgquiles at elpauer.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IMHO a proper implementation needs to be a QPA platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Widgets need to be "drawn" in this "web" target, like in X11, Wayland,
>>>>>> Windows, etc. The only change would be the low level primitives are HTML +
>>>>>> CSS + JavaScript + SVG (and maybe even images), like Wt does.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trivia: the first version of Wt used Qt instead as the backend. They
>>>>>> moved to Boost because of licensing (Qt was not LGPL back then) and
>>>>>> threading.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:55 AM, <lars.knoll at nokia.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >From my point of view:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having something here would be great. I don't think it should be part
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the essential Qt modules, but as an add-on it would be a very welcome
>>>>>>> addition :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Lars
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/22/11 7:09 AM, "ext Mark Constable" <markc at renta.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >On 2011-10-21 10:10 PM, Dhaivat Pandya wrote:
>>>>>>> >> This seems like something that's way out there, and may have been
>>>>>>> >> suggested before and rejected, but, I'm bringing it up anyway.
>>>>>>> What
>>>>>>> >> would the Qt community think of a web framework devised around Qt?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Speaking personally I'd love to see...
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >. a web server similar to lighttpd but 100% based on Qt
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >. a Qt5/V8 Javascript "engine" similar to NodeJS
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >. an optional but builtin C++ FastCGI interface for the above
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >In other words the essential tools for a Qt Server Side JavaScript
>>>>>>> >solution, with Websocket support, so it can be as both a traditional
>>>>>>> >webserver or a local backend to a HTML5/QML desktop system.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Why another webserver when lighttpd, nginx, even apache, already
>>>>>>> exist
>>>>>>> >as stable codebases? Because none of them allow me to build, develop
>>>>>>> >and deploy them, and any web based projects, within QtCreator using
>>>>>>> >CMake and Git. There is currently a complete development disconnect
>>>>>>> >when deploying a typical HTTP based remote server within a Qt
>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> Qt has all the stuff one needs to build a legitimate web
>>>>>>> framework,
>>>>>>> >> connection to a scripting language (PySide, or any language with a
>>>>>>> C++
>>>>>>> >> API, such as Lua), Sql libraries, async socket libraries, XML,
>>>>>>> >> everything. We just need some (okay, not some, a lot) of code to
>>>>>>> glue
>>>>>>> >> this all together into a well knit package. I'll await
>>>>>>> suggestions.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Wouldn't Wt provide a lot of that? http://www.webtoolkit.eu/wt
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >_______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >Development mailing list
>>>>>>> >Development at qt-project.org
>>>>>>> >http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Development mailing list
>>>>>>> Development at qt-project.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Pau Garcia i Quiles
>>>>>> http://www.elpauer.org
>>>>>> (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Development mailing list
>>>>>> Development at qt-project.org
>>>>>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Pau Garcia i Quiles
>>>> http://www.elpauer.org
>>>> (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pau Garcia i Quiles
>> http://www.elpauer.org
>> (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20111022/5707946d/attachment.html>