[Development] Perceptions/Understandings of the QML language [was: Question about Qt's future]

[Alan Alpert]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Bubke Marco <Marco.Bubke at digia.com> wrote:
>
>
> Alan Alpert:
>> That said, part of the path from becoming a trailblazer to being the
>> dominant force ruling the world is IDE and tooling support. We want to
>> improve tooling capabilities wherever we can do so (without
>> compromising the 'untooled' developer experience - I know they
>
> Hmm, again a hard code programmer who is writing his code in "CLAY"
> with his own fingertips. Sometimes he thinks about using this new tool
> "Stick" but that would be uncool. ;-)

I want "Clay", "Stick" and "Pen" (a mythical future development, the
likes of which we cannot even imagine!) developers all supported. Just
because I'm set in my ways doesn't mean that I should force them on
others, or be shunned because I'm different. The path of the idealist
is hard, but ultimately rewarding.

>> frequently clash, and the direct dev exp. takes precedence IMHO). This
>> may require fresh new trailblazing tools, but that's just the nature
>> of progress.
>
> So we waiting that you writing this "fresh new trailblazing tools"! But maybe
> you like more to stick with your fingers in "CLAY". ;-)

I'm happy with my current tool set. My point here was more that we
*may* need to innovate on the visual tools, and not end up with a
clone of Qt Designer. But since I don't use the visual tools, I'm not
the authority here. I just want us to consider that both sides, the
tooling and the tool-ability, are flexible so they may both grow to
meet in the middle (conceptually grow, in terms of implementation
you've obviously grown the QML tooling a lot already).

--
Alan Alpert