[Interest] query about QT textbooks

[Jason H]

The key to using Qt correctly is learning the design patterns it provides. Therefore a book on that would be the best place to start. Fortunately that book is free. http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780131879058/downloads/0131879057_Ezust_book.pdf

My comments about using Qt are thus: if it's "hard" you're doing it wrong. Just like with Python there is a "Pythonic" way. The same applies to Qt. There is one area where Qt makes little sense and that is in using the model-view stuff. It's a bit over engineered, however it is not so bad as to need a correction, and is still very worth learning.

I've had the "opportunity" to leard Win32, MFC, .Net and a touch of Java, and Qt is my favorite event though it is C++. The only way I found to improve on Qt was to use PyQt (or PySide) and use Qt from Python. (Using list comprehensions with Qt is a joy.)

Anyway, I wouldn't focus on any other books until you have the Qt design patterns down. It's like learning to fight. First you learn how to fight with your body, then you add weapons which are just an extension. Master the design patterns and the rest is just extension.




________________________________
 From: Mark Griffith <markgriffith at yahoo.com>
To: interest at qt-project.org 
Cc: Mark Griffith <markgriffith at yahoo.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:55 AM
Subject: [Interest] query about QT textbooks
 

.

I'd like to ask about books anyone can recommend for beginner developers using QT. The tutorials on the site have some value, but they really aren't good enough, as I explain below. If you're bored easily, don't read on. 

--  --  --  --  --

I'm a bit wearied by the constant use of undefined special words like 'binaries', 'declarative', 'parent', and sentences like "To use the states.png image in your application, you must copy it to the
 project directory (same subdirectory as the QML file) from the examples
 directory in the Qt installation directory." where this is the first time 'states.png' gets mentioned. 

I'm not totally computer-illiterate - I have reasonable maths skills as an ex-economist, and have built several websites unaided in straight HTML without using an editing package or code editor. I have written simple programs. But I do have a life outside this world, and would like to see software documentation conform to the same standards of clarity we expect from (say) people who write company annual reports to shareholders - which is about the same level of inherent complexity that needs to be cleaned up. 

Also, I must concede that software writing has improved hugely in twenty years. It's gone from about 10% comprehensible to about 40% comprehensible, which is of course a massive achievement, though nowhere near good enough. 

Nonetheless, software documentation, QT included, still has a long long way to go before it is as
 lucid as it could be and should be. 

It could all be hugely better if software firms forgot technical writers and employed real commercial writers (like the writers who work at ad agencies and magazines) to rewrite and re-edit all these tutorials. That and proper footnotes _on the same page_ defining each term and offering extra clarity would transform computing overnight. 

Rant over. Thanks if you have book suggestions. 

Mark
 
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest at qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20120411/dbc662fa/attachment.html>