[Interest] Qt Quick Controls 1 deprecated but no native styles for Qt Quick Controls 2?

[Jean-Michaël Celerier]

> Qt Widgets is, as far as I know, always rendered in software, so how
would it be faster than Qt Quick rendered in software?

In my experience QPainter is quite faster than LLVMPipe or other openGL
software rendering solutions.
Also, Qt Widgets does not have as many fancy animations / tweening
everywhere by default that would make stuff slower.

If we look at the other UI toolkits, WPF which is also scene-graph-backed
has a lot of cases where it fallbacks to software for instance :
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/jgoldb/2010/06/22/software-rendering-usage-in-wpf/

in particular I've been hit by the texture size problem in qt quick :
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-60210 , as well as this one which is
fairly frustrating on linux:  https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-46074

Best,

-------
Jean-Michaël Celerier
http://www.jcelerier.name


On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 6:47 PM Dimitar Dobrev via Interest <
interest at lists.qt-project.org> wrote:

> Video cards which don't support OpenGL are without a doubt a small
> minority. Even if we assume it's a significant minority, have you actually
> measured the performance of Qt Widgets versus Qt Quick with no hardware
> support? In other words, Qt Widgets is, as far as I know, always rendered
> in software, so how would it be faster than Qt Quick rendered in software?
>
> The argument for performance and easiness has been made more than a year
> ago by the Qt team itself, as I've pointed out earlier in this thread. I
> haven't said even once that it's easy. I've only been saying it's necessary.
> On 10.12.18 18:52, Dmitriy Purgin wrote:
>
> Don't forget that in order to use QCC2 you will need a graphic card with
> OpenGL support or rely on the rather slow software implementation (was it
> GPL only btw?). Qt Widgets don't need a 3D accelerator. There are still use
> cases where you don't have an OpenGL-enabled environment. Making QCC2
> looking native on Desktop in order to make Desktop applications would -in
> my opinion- just mean that you waste computing power on rendering controls
> that can be rendered easier, with less dependencies and without need to
> provide QML-to-C++ bridges.
>
> Cheers
> Dmitriy
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 4:35 PM Dimitar Dobrev via Interest <
> interest at lists.qt-project.org> wrote:
>
>> On 10.12.18 16:43, Vlad Stelmahovsky wrote:
>>
>> > My point is that QtWidgets limited with desktop apps only
>> >
>> An excellent point, Vlad, thank you for reminding me. Yes, this is
>> exactly right - the lack of native styles in Qt Quick Controls 2 would
>> ruin mobile development with Qt as well. Most mobile applications need
>> to look native, in fact, the only major exception are games.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest at lists.qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at lists.qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/attachments/20181210/16d7347f/attachment.html>