On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 07:43:09AM +0000, Hartmann Thomas wrote: > > I think at least three modifications are inavoidable: For one, things that > > could be written in a declarative way but which currently are only possible > > using JavaScript, a declarative way should be added. Second, it should be > > stressed in the documentation (including the examples), that using > > inline imperative code is naughty. This can be supported by e.g. the QML > > Designer refusing to operate on such files. People can still do that, but > > would be on their own. And finally, and that's also acting as a proof that > > the first two items actually have been done, the JavaScript dependency > > should be _optional_. > > Can we turn this into action points we _all_ agree on? > My personal favorites are (In no strict order): > (1) Identify non declarative parts of Qt Quick and add declarative API > (e.g. setting states) > (2) Document that inline Java Script and mixing declarative and > imperative code in one file has its pitfalls in big projects and creates > issues for tooling. Explain the difference between pure declarative QML > and QMLJS and the impact on tooling. > (3) Document that accessing ids from other .qml files without any > interface (just relying on the fact that they are in the context) creates > hard to maintain QML code. > (4) Writing (more) QML(JS) static analyzers that can check/enforce a > proper strict mode for QML. > (5) Write refactoring tools that help to clean up existing code. > (6) Fix/cleanup existing demos and examples. > (7) Investigate how we can improve the interplay of QML and C++. > Especially in C++/backend heavy projects.
Looks good, and realistic. Andre' _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development