[Qt-interest] The argument for Qt

[Rui Maciel]

Thiago Macieira wrote:

> On Thursday, 20 de October de 2011 19:37:32 Rui Maciel wrote:
>> I don't believe that it is reasonable to tie Qt's future so closely to
>> KDE's future.  KDE has been subjected to a hand full of major rewrites
>> which included switching the underlying application framework.
> 
> You're probably referring to the Qt 3 to Qt 4 porting.
> 
>> Qt may be nice to
>> use but I suspect it takes a whole lot of work to maintain and develop,
>> particularly due to MOC.
> 
> That makes no sense. Yes, it is very hard to maintain it, but there's no
> reason why moc would make it more difficult.

Don't you agree that the added work needed to develop and maintain a 
specialized macro preprocessor in order to use a library ends up taking more 
work than simply developing the application framework alone?


>> So, I wouldn't bet Qt's future on the idea that KDE will be around for
>> some time.  KDE may actually be developed for ages, but nothing forces
>> KDE to stick with Qt.
> 
> Yes, it does.

It does what?  Your reply doesn't address any of the sentences you quoted.


Rui Maciel