On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Bubke Marco <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Alan Alpert: >> That said, part of the path from becoming a trailblazer to being the >> dominant force ruling the world is IDE and tooling support. We want to >> improve tooling capabilities wherever we can do so (without >> compromising the 'untooled' developer experience - I know they > > Hmm, again a hard code programmer who is writing his code in "CLAY" > with his own fingertips. Sometimes he thinks about using this new tool > "Stick" but that would be uncool. ;-)
I want "Clay", "Stick" and "Pen" (a mythical future development, the likes of which we cannot even imagine!) developers all supported. Just because I'm set in my ways doesn't mean that I should force them on others, or be shunned because I'm different. The path of the idealist is hard, but ultimately rewarding. >> frequently clash, and the direct dev exp. takes precedence IMHO). This >> may require fresh new trailblazing tools, but that's just the nature >> of progress. > > So we waiting that you writing this "fresh new trailblazing tools"! But maybe > you like more to stick with your fingers in "CLAY". ;-) I'm happy with my current tool set. My point here was more that we *may* need to innovate on the visual tools, and not end up with a clone of Qt Designer. But since I don't use the visual tools, I'm not the authority here. I just want us to consider that both sides, the tooling and the tool-ability, are flexible so they may both grow to meet in the middle (conceptually grow, in terms of implementation you've obviously grown the QML tooling a lot already). -- Alan Alpert _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
