[Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

André Somers andre at familiesomers.nl
Wed Apr 6 12:41:36 CEST 2016

Op 06/04/2016 om 12:19 schreef Emre Besirik:
>> On 06 Apr 2016, at 12:43, Martijn Buijs <martijn.buijs at gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you believe that QtCreator should become a better tool for you than
>> what it is now, I would suggest starting to write down the issues as
>> you started doing in the response to Jean-Michaël Celerier and make
>> sure to take a constructive approach. It's fine to point to another
>> IDE as an example to describe some functionality that you would like
>> to have, but leave the pointless judgments that might insult people.
>> For example in the list above you mention "I for example like to work
>> with implementations in one side and headers other but it is really
>> hard to first select the view you want the code to open in, I don’t
>> know how many times I opened in the wrong/unintended view, it is not
>> user friendly", I would suggest you to leave out just the part "it is
>> not user friendly" and instead focus on how everyone can benefit of
>> your improvement.
>> One by one these things should be improved, that's the way to benefit
>> from the existing functionality in QtCreator and the things that can
>> be learned from new and exciting other IDE's. It's a community
>> project, not just a company that just decides to do a complete rewrite
>> of all code. Even company's frequently fail to do such complete
>> rewrites: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html
>>> see my point? list can go on forever… so logically I can only provide basic
>>> principles and some good examples or better yet please lets have help from a
>>> UI/UX expert. They maybe don’t have a magic wand but they have experience on
>>> explaining these things in words, analyzing power… They can anaylize,
>>> understand and explain thigns we can only feel...
>> Rebuilding QtCreator will not magically solve these issues. Even when
>> 1-on-1 copying all functionality of CLion, in the end it will still be
>> worse, because JetBrains is not waiting for QtCreator to catch up. If
>> CLion really works great for you, I suggest trying to get support for
>> Qt in CLion instead of trying to change QtCreator.
>> Martijn
> I acknowlegde that writing a complete IDE is no easy task and I do appreciate the team for doing it in the first place. and what I’m talking about in the last couple of days are not intended to deminish their hard work, its a fully functional IDE afterall. What I’m trying to say is either the team is not big enough to handle things beyond core functionality or simply there is no UI/UX expert to guide devs on user experience. it is not a fault of anyone but just a fact that there is a need for a UI/UX expert. otherwise we will have a fully functional, fully capable IDE that very small amount of people will want to use.
> And ok lets go to bugreports and fill all the things we can think of but I think that in the end will not help much because user experience is a flow and should be handled as a complete subject, not little by little issues… thats why I’m insisting on at least one UI/UX expert should be on the team to guide them, otherwise if you leave it to the bugreports you’ll be leaving the judgement of accepting the feature requests to the devs who may or may not like it. after all some of those little things may require A LOT of work or very fundamental changes which may freak out devs but if a UI/UX expert in the team can insist on requirement of that particular change and convince them to go for it…
As you are insisting that the team needs a UX expert, care to sponsor one?


More information about the Interest mailing list