[Interest] QML performance on iOS?

[André Pönitz]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:54:21AM -0800, Alan Alpert wrote:
> Why not tell them that QML is native?

Believe it or not, some people simply dislike the idea of lying.

With "native" people usually associate certain properties, like
performance, lack of separate run time environment, seemless blending
with other native libraries and tools, painless deployment using
the same well-trodden path all the other kids take, too.

> It is just instantiating a tree
> of C++ objects (if you aren't using JS bindings).

JS is not optional in QML. Some people have argued hard that it should
be an optional layer of JS (and possibly other) bindings on top of
a non-scripted core, but there has been no progress whatsoever. Not
even an effort.

> If you do a C++/QML
> app, with C++ for the logic instead of JS,

This is not possible right now, and not considered "in scope" for
the future.

> then the only performance cost over "100% native" will be the startup time.

Which already would be prohibitive. But as stated above the setup
you suggest (and know to not exist) is not possible anyway.

Andre'
 
> --
> Alan Alpert
> 
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Jason H <scorp1us at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I have been talking to many people about the iOS availability of QML.
> > Repeatedly, I run into the response "We want to keep it native because of
> > performance" Invariably, these people have tried Flash and it didn't work
> > out well. What can I do/say to convince them otherwise. I figure QML would
> > perform well, using all the native stuff and scene graph. Has anyone done
> > flash, native and QML and can elaborate on the relative performance ?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Interest mailing list
> > Interest at qt-project.org
> > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest