[Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

Emre Besirik nomercy at gmail.com
Tue Apr 5 18:02:14 CEST 2016

> On 05 Apr 2016, at 18:40, Prav <pr12og2 at programist.ru> wrote:
> Does anyone here think that discussion of this question in current way would not help anyone?
> We are programmer ... not philosophers. So ideas like "eons away from QtC" is non-understandable
> (like infinity) so not profitable for our lives.
> As I can get:
> There are some things which make some people feel not so comfortable comparing to what they feel
> when they work in another IDE. And those people want QtC be better. So why would not we agree
> that those who feel bad with some aspects of QtC would first create are bug-report or feature-suggestion
> at https://bugreports.qt.io/ site and ONLY after that say what he misses from QtC here.
> I would also suggest to make a list of those things which make QtC not as good as CLion
> ... somewhere ...  for example at https://wiki.qt.io/
> Everybody who feels missing features would be welcome to add its bug-report (or feature-request) to this
> list. And that would give everybody clear understanding what does "eons away" means.
> This list can also play the role of "list of little shame" for Qt-developers so that they would be more active
> to try to fix those bugs or implement feature requests (which is as I can get is the main purpose for someone
> to say that QtC is "eons away from CLion").
> As the result this discussion would benefit those who implement QtC (because they have exact questions) and
> those who ask QtC developer be more active in making them feel better in process usage of QtC.
> I am not in QtC fun-club.
> For example my bug
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTCREATORBUG-14464
> was reported like 1 year ago and it says that renaming refactoring can change the code so that it
> is hard (almost impossible) to revert it back to “compilable” state. I am always in fear during every renaming refactoring in QtC
> (because project-wide renaming refactoring is irreversible in QtC so Ctrl-Z would not help ;) ).
> And I really do not know where to see how valuable this bug in priority list for fixes for next QtC release ! :(
> I feel problems too.
> Nor I am against QtC. Because it integrates   GUI editor   and   help for Qt functions better than CLion or VisualStudio.
> I like its "several split"-idea with shortcuts like "follow symbol in the next split" (which is absent in VisualStudio or CLion … as I know).
> So maybe we better to discuss how exactly we would make flow of critics from CLion users to be precise
> and helpful for both-sides? And only after setting rules for that we would start discuss critics itself ...
> because after that there would be real things to discuss ... but not only heap of opinions in our mailing boxes.
> Sorry for being so detailed in this letter. I was so wondered that we keep this long discussion in such unprofitable way.

That I can agree with! Thank you for your more cunstructive comments on the issue. All I wanted from the start of this thread was at least please agree on that it is not perfect, there is really room for improvement and lets discuss on what we can do together? instead allmost all I get was "why don’t you do it your self", "I’m happy", "if you don’t like it don’t use it" kind of responses… 
I don’t mean the JB products are perfect but many developers around the world will agree that they are at least trying to ease the jobs of developers more than any other and most importantly they are trying to make coding a joy. We may be loving our jobs already but isn’t it better to feel joy when we use our everyday tools?

Emre Beşirik
nomercy at gmail.com

More information about the Interest mailing list