[Development] The place of QML

Atlant Schmidt aschmidt at dekaresearch.com
Thu May 17 20:18:14 CEST 2012


Peter:

> Then Qt Widgets is perfect for you: mature, stable API. You
> only would have a problem when you have to implement features
> which are much better supported by QML.

  Did I mention that we're also coded to depend upon QWS, the
  QT Embedded Window System? ;-)

  That feature is no longer available in Qt 5.x. And switching
  to Lighthouse would require substantial recoding on our part.

                            Atlant

-----Original Message-----

From: development-bounces+aschmidt=dekaresearch.com at qt-project.org [mailto:development-bounces+aschmidt=dekaresearch.com at qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Peter K├╝mmel
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 12:24
Cc: development at qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] The place of QML

On 17.05.2012 12:35, Atlant Schmidt wrote:
> Peter, et al.:
>
>> We don't wanna use obsolete stuff with a "architecture from
>> the 90s" in times where "graphical technology has moved on" (Thiago).
>
>    Computer architectures don't necessarily "become obsolete".
>    Oh, trends come and trends go, but the fundamental concepts
>    go on forever. For example, Linux is quite popular even
>    though it is arguably a "computer architecture from 1970".
>
>    Often, the proponents arguing for "new and improved" are
>    simply arguing for the position they think will be most fun
>    to work on; after all, it's always more fun to break exciting
>    new ground than it is to have trod the same old sod yet again.
>    But many of these new approaches are just "fashion" and if you
>    wait a few years, fashions will change again and "old and
>    obsolete" will be back in fashion (and often, simply because
>    good sense has returned to the design community).
>
>
>> Most people don't care what happens under the hood (QWidget
>> or QML) when good desktop support is available.
>
>    And some of us *DO* care very much what goes on under the
>    hood. Me, I live in an embedded world running on a ~450 MHz
>    processor with very limited RAM and graphics. There's just
>    enough "stuff" there to make the traditional Qt approach
>    work (just barely) but if the only choice Qt intends to
>    offer me in the future is going to burden me with the
>    overhead of a JavaScript (or even web) runtime, then I'm
>    going to need a new graphical framework.
>
>    Old and obsolete worked for me; New and improved (in this
>    case) clearly isn't likely to.

Then Qt Widgets is perfect for you: mature, stable API. You
only would have a problem when you have to implement features
which are much better supported by QML.

>
>                         Atlant


This e-mail and the information, including any attachments, it contains are intended to be a confidential communication only to the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender and destroy the original message.

Thank you.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.



More information about the Development mailing list