On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 09:38:15 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
On Monday, 14 October 2013 at 09:45:18 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:
I recommend to dump it and start from scratch. A clang-based
generator would be an interesting option to explore. Or, if
you want to preserve your sanity, just write Qt applications
in C++/QML.
Hi Max, so why dump it? I can see a few reasons why you might
propose that:
1) You think it's a dead end because QtJambi is dead, so it
would
be problematic to move it forward with new versions of Qt
That is one reason. Also, QtJambi is based on a limited and
outdated C++ parser, and we had problems getting necessary
information from it. When Qt moves to C++11, the situation will
get worse. So I think it is reasonable to switch to clang soon.
OK I see (unfortunately !)
Long story short, D allows for two approaches to bindings like
QtD:
1. The traditional one is to allocate "shells" on GC heap and
have a set of manually specified rules for ownership transfers
and reference count adjustments.
2. The other is more interesting - abandon the idea of
reference/ownership annotations and go with semi-automatic
memory management as it is in Qt, with no reliance on the GC.
At some point I wanted to switch to 2 completely, so QtD is
somewhere between 1 and 2, quite a mess.
I did notice when in the code that it was partially in a
transitional state - now I know what you were doing!
I have to confess that in the light of this and some of your
other posts, the siren call of 'start again' is singing in my ear.
