[Interest] Which "Widget" technology to use when starting a new desktop app

[Mike Jackson]

Jason H wrote:
>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 at 11:19 AM From: "Bob
>> Hood"<bhood2 at comcast.net> To: interest at qt-project.org Subject: Re:
>> [Interest] Which "Widget" technology to use when starting a new
>> desktop app
>>
>> On 1/5/2017 8:51 AM, william.crocker at analog.com wrote:
>>> On 01/05/2017 10:29 AM, Bob Hood wrote:
>>>> On 1/5/2017 8:03 AM, Jason H wrote:
>>>>> The mantra is to use QML.
>>>> I just wrote a wonderful utility using Qt 5.6.2 and Widgets for
>>>> the desktop, and there's no hint of QML in it.  It functions
>>>> beautifully, is easily maintainable, and even has full
>>>> animations.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the mantra is QML.  The mantra is: Look at your
>>>> need, your goal, and choose the Qt technology that best fits
>>>> it. If that's QML, fine. If that's Widgets, fine.  Unless Qt
>>>> reps step up here and support your statement (which will have
>>>> ramifications for me and, I'm sure, many others), summarily
>>>> stating to somebody that they should use QML as the primary
>>>> tech for a new desktop app is, I think, dogmatic, at best, and
>>>> continues to fuel the anxiety that Qt is pouring all the love
>>>> into a QML/mobile focus.
>>> ... you mean, it isn't ?
>>
>> Certainly, it would seem to be the case, but if that's also an
>> official position, then I'd appreciate a representative of Qt
>> stepping up and saying so publicly.  I would have decisions to make
>> concerning my project's commercial license, and my product's future
>> direction, based upon it.
>
> Well with the QtQuick Controls 2 of 5.7, I think the future is
> slanted to QML. Having extensively coded in both, I do prefer QML,
> though I still wax nostalgic over Widgets. Those layouts were amazing
> and I wasn't plagued with binding loops for width or height. (The
> implicitHeight/implicitWidth vs actual height/width vs preferred
> (from Widgets)  is still a rough edge that needs to worked out.
> There's not consistency on implicits vs actual vs others (painted).
>
> QML is almost "there" in terms of it's original dream of having
> Designers worry about appearance while letting the Engineers be
> decoupled to focus on the logic. I think I'm one intermediate
> QtObject away from being able to do that.
>
> I've also used PyQt to do a precurosr to QML w.r.t the ease of a
> scripting language but being able to use Qt's widgets. QML satisfies
> that niche, and is sufficiently supported.
>

Does the upcoming Qt 5.8 solve any of these issues? Do you find the 
"Built in" styles acceptable for applications or do you end up bringing 
in a UX engineer to style the components?

Thanks
Mike Jackson