[Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

Vlad Stelmahovsky vladstelmahovsky at gmail.com
Thu Sep 22 08:27:27 CEST 2016


Actually you can vote for it and promote to other users to vote for it.
More votes - more chances issue to be solved

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:

> This gets at what I don't like about Qt the most: As a user I have no
> control of where it goes. I can (and do) file bugs and feature
> suggestions... How they get prioritized, I have no control over. Sometimes
> it's months, sometimes it's multiple years later, very often it's never (or
> more correctly, still not implemented yet). This is despite being a paying
> customer. Once the issue is entered, it might get tagged with the support
> contract level I am on, but it's effectively out of my hands.
>
>
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 8:35 AM
> > From: "Konstantin Tokarev" <annulen at yandex.ru>
> > To: "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celerier at gmail.com>, "Jason H"
> <jhihn at gmx.com>
> > Cc: interest <interest at qt-project.org>, "Rob Allan" <
> rob_allan at trimble.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
> >
> >
> >
> > 21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celerier at gmail.
> com>:
> > > Hey, there is a lot of interesting points in all these answers; some
> similars, some not.
> > >
> > > Maybe a good way forward would be to try to pinpoint the problems more
> precisely with an online platform such
> > > as http://en.arguman.org/ ? Or even just some kind of google doc...
> >
> > I think wiki page would be a better alternative.
> >
> > >
> > > Starting from there would maybe make it easier for the Qt devs to
> weigh the "for" and "against" for the stuff that is often mentioned ?
> >
> > I doubt anyone here is going to weigh anything besides patches submitted
> to review.
> >
> > > Instead of having to find specific arguments in 45 mails...  And then
> open some paths for contributions to try to alleviate the problems.
> > >
> > > My 0.0005 cents
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Jean-Michaël
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:
> > >>> I also can't help making a comparison with two other popular layout
> > >>> frameworks: WPF/XAML, and Android/AXML. In both of these worlds, the
> markup
> > >>> language and the "code-behind" class hierarchy of UI elements are
> > >>> absolutely equivalent 1st class citizens. Anything you can do in
> XAML, you
> > >>> can also do in the C# code-behind, whether it be creating controls,
> > >>> changing their properties, altering layouts, etc. Likewise in
> Android/AXML,
> > >>> I can (if I choose) create FrameLayouts, RelativeLayouts, TextViews,
> etc in
> > >>> code, and arrange them and manipulate them any way I like, as an
> > >>> alternative to creating an AXML designer layout.
> > >>>
> > >>> It seems unfortunate that Qt Quick doesn't take this approach, and
> that the
> > >>> "code-behind" experience is so limited. One reason that I've heard
> why it
> > >>> might have been done this way is that a rich and fully public C++
> interface
> > >>> may have hamstrung the developers too much, as there would be
> constant
> > >>> breaking changes from one release to the next. If that's true then I
> guess
> > >>> I understand that, but I would still rather put up with a rich C++
> > >>> interface that had breaking changes at new releases, than the
> relative
> > >>> limited C++ interface we have now.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not sure I follow. Declarituce UI is in. QML, React (+JSX)  give
> you decaritive layouts. It convergent evolution of stucture±properties+code
> > >>
> > >> XAML, WPF, Qt Widgets all have structure and properties but no code.
> You've got to create the objects then in another context, assign code to
> them.
> > >>
> > >> If you are taking about how QQuickItems wrap C++ my understanding is
> that's because of the scene graph. My perspective is that the C++ side is
> better before I'm always having to drop from QML to C++ to expose stuff for
> QML. So I really don't understand your issue?
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Konstantin
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>



-- 
Best regards,
Vlad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20160922/48ed51ec/attachment.html>


More information about the Interest mailing list