[Qt-creator] Annoyance with 4.11

Michael Jackson mike.jackson at bluequartz.net
Thu Feb 20 16:31:28 CET 2020


Dear Christian, 
   I feel your pain. I empathize with your situation, BUT, there are other IDE's available. I am going to assume based on earlier emails that other IDE's are available at your employer. VS 2019 is available and is quite nice. JetBrains CLion is also available and nice. Both are paid products (in your situation with developing commercial software).

No one "wants" to be a beta tester for a product but back when I coded more I would start using the nightly builds of the next version fairly regularly so I could report issues before QtC came out and I had to wait another 6 months for a new build. I have used my own time to report back on areas that *I* thought were important. Sometimes if you care about the product enough (does not matter which product) sometimes you just need to act as a "tester". No body's QA can catch every bug in their product.

On the issue of CMake, I use it every day and I don't mind what it brings to the table as a cross platform developer. Let's agree to disagree about CMake. I will only say that the CMake support has gotten consistently better over the years. Yes, it is still a bit "fragile" for some setups. Historically there was a lot of friction to including CMake support into QtC in the early years. I think there was a tipping point in the software dev community where CMake finally got enough traction that adding in first class CMake support was pretty much a necessity. Even Visual Studio bundles CMake in their latest and has an "Open CMake Project" functionality built into Visual Studio.

Now that Qt6 uses CMake for its build system I am hoping that QtC will smooth out some of the rough edges when it comes to CMake integration. I personally gave up on the "Project View" and just use the "File System View" instead since we organize our sources via folders in the project. I only added the code inside of our CMake files for the Visual Studio developers when I started to use VS myself and saw the complete disaster that was our VS solutions files. So there might be some Cmake codes that could be added to better organize your own sources. This also helps IDEs like QtC and VS from guessing your structure and have CMake define the structure that you want to see in the IDE.


Cheers. I hope it all works out for you.
--
Michael Jackson | Owner, President
      BlueQuartz Software
[e] mike.jackson at bluequartz.net
[w] www.bluequartz.net <http://www.bluequartz.net>

´╗┐On 2/20/20, 4:45 AM, "Qt-creator on behalf of Christian Gagneraud" <qt-creator-bounces at qt-project.org on behalf of chgans at gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 21:52, Christian Kandeler
    <Christian.Kandeler at qt.io> wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 11:01:32 +1300
    > Christian Gagneraud <chgans at gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > > But my point was quite simple:
    > > QtC 4.11 is broken, and has been released untested (or was knowingly
    > > buggy), it doesn't seem to be anywhere near release quality (or i'm
    > > really unlucky).
    >
    > This sounds quite hyperbolic, considering that your problem is just that the project tree structure looks slightly different from what you'd prefer.
    
    This sounds quite reverse hyperbolic. Like you're over-minimising the
    impact of this bug.
    
    For personal reason, i had to switch from a friendly 24/7 open source
    user to a 8h/day, 5d/w commercial user.
    The project explorer is a GUI component that assists the user with
    graphically exploring a project.
    The screenshots i sent recently clearly show a regression, not a
    'preference issue'.
    
    Please as well take a note of my comment about cmake plugin being
    immature, my hate of this build system is orthogonal with the problem.
    If it's not ready, it should be marked as such. There's no exemption.
    Some of QtC plugins have been marked as experimental for 5+ years.
    
    And IMHO the regression nature of this problem (what i refer to as an
    'annoyance' in my original email) is backed by the fact that it was
    fixed with QtC-4.12. You wouldn't fix a non-problem, would you?
    
    What i'm surprised, and unhappy with is that there's no bug fix
    available with the now-commercial-only Qt SDK installer, and my
    current Qt install is broken (I'm paid to use QtC 8 hours a day, and
    right now i cannot rely on your commercial offering, they just don't
    work) . You rely on me to be an 'advanced' user. Unfortunately this
    time is now gone.
    The only option i got from the installer was to install an obsolete
    QtC 4.11 preview version. WTF?!?
    This doesn't look serious to me. You guys failed on that one, and it's
    OK, shit happens.
    
    If you're serious with getting the business up to scratch, you better
    have to deliver commercial solutions up to scratch.
    
    I am highly unimpressed with the 'commercial' solution so far.
    
    With all due respect, please always take my emails with a pinch of
    salt - But not too much, i really mean what i said! :P
    
    Chris
    
    PS: I was told about the fact that none of the 'business' guy listen
    to this ML. Unfortunately my commercial leverage is close to minus
    infinity.
    We're a minority using QtC here, and given the 'bug' reported above,
    and the reaction form the the Qt Company, my job of helping you with
    getting developers adopt QtC in favour of, say MS VS or Android studio
    is quite slim.
    
    **** I would look ridiculous to show them the screenshot i sent to you ***
    
    Do you understand?
    _______________________________________________
    Qt-creator mailing list
    Qt-creator at qt-project.org
    https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/qt-creator
    




More information about the Qt-creator mailing list