[Interest] Lar's Technical Vision blog post
vladstelmahovsky at gmail.com
Tue Aug 13 16:53:51 CEST 2019
Qt6 efforts to be efficient on both low level HW and on high level HW,
which is impossible w/o c++ backend
noone care about making web developers happy (besides web developers
themselves :) )
Flutter rather compete with Java-based apps, where it will gains from
performance perspective, but..again, c++ support in Flutter is still not
even close to production
And UI development in Flutter splitted up between platforms eliminating all
of the efforts to create single codebase
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:44 PM Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com> wrote:
> I am wondering if there will be a follow up or response thread?
> There's a lot of good feedback. It was good to see inside Lars's head, and
> what is not. I think he got a lot right, thought I'm scratching my head on
> the AI comment. There's two things I'd like to bing up though.
> The first thing that stuck out is others mentioned and I re-iterated, is
> comparing Qt to Google's Flutter. It seems to have significant overlap with
> Qt (Even the Dart syntax is declarative-like) and I see it as probably the
> end of Qt, unless Qt 6 can differentiate. If I were a developer starting
> out today, I'd probably choose Flutter.
> Next, IMHO Qt is not doing enough to target enough developers, and this is
> where I have to re-iterate that QML should be an open web standard. (QMLWeb
> https://github.com/qmlweb/qmlweb , has atrophied) If you can capture the
> market of Web developers, that's the biggest developer market there is.
> Where I currently work we have a standing order that all software should be
> web-based except for the code that runs on devices (Arduinos and Mobile)
> which can't. Now I got Qt and a license for mobile before Flutter was a
> thing, so my work is grandfathered in, but we're likely to move to Flutter
> at some point because the web team can help out with that. Also, flutter's
> Web support is still a "tech preview"
> Big fish, small pond vs. small fish big pond. But the small pond is
> drying up. C++'s modernization efforts are too little to late, and hardly
> feel that I have a clue what's going on in modern C++ despite writing c++
> for 20 years now. And with the new async/await it's only going to get
> worse. QML has to be the primary language for Qt 6, and it's got to work on
> the web to at least stay in contention with Flutter. My boss balked at it
> at first when I mentioned C++. He thinks it's too hard for most developers
> to do right. (And he's right). QML saved the day.
> Not only that but Qt's licensing is far more complicated than the BSD-like
> license of Flutter. But you've got to be careful about what's LGPL, GPL,
> commercial, or "other".
> Anyway, I don't know if it's a good idea to start this thread but not
> everyone follows the blog. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> I really like Wt (Witty, Qt4-like widgets for the web
> https://webtoolkit.eu ) But I'm hoping with the new Wt HTTP server we can
> get a HTML/QML client to talk to a Qt model server, the same way Wt works.
> I think WASM and WebGL are the wrong way for Qt to target the web.
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Interest