Em seg 28 abr 2014, às 23:34:21, André Pönitz escreveu: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:12:47AM -0700, Alan Alpert wrote: > > Yes, I agree that more rigorous and agreed definitions would be > > helpful. It also takes time, and impedes innovation, so I'm not sure > > if we're quite mature enough to "nail down" QML just yet. Should be > > soon though, in the next few years. > > To get this straight: After five years of development the "Maintainer" of > the Qt Declarative module is neither able nor willing to give a simple > definition of what "QML" is.
I can't also explain very well what QtCore is and it has existed for 10 years now. It's the low-level interface to the OS and basic and tool classes, plus a part of the XML support, but not all of it. And the item models. And the state machine. Oh, and a few more tidbits that ended up in QtCore because they are not really graphical in nature. So is QtCore the kitchen sink? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
