"retard" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:53:50 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > >> Eldar Insafutdinov wrote: >>> Right now we are working on a next QtD version. We dropped support for >>> D1, it is D2 only. I believe Qt suits all your requirements very well. >>> It's performant - we try to emulate as many C++ types using D structs >>> as possible, for drawing purposes. So types like QPoint - are D structs >>> and for drawing lines you can pass D array directly. No perfromance >>> hit. But of course we cannot avoid all of them, it is still a binding. >>> Regarding the license, Qt itself is LGPLed, QtD is boost. you don't >>> have to put any attribution. About stability of APIs - Qt4 is stable >>> within the major version. At the moment we are working on signals/slots >>> implementation. It is mostly complete, but syntax may change. It will >>> hopefully change once and stay forever. >>> >>> I would say that QtD is in the state close to that of D2, almost there, >>> but not quite ready yet. But we intend to release the next version, >>> which will be ready to use earlier than D2 anyway, I would say within a >>> month. >> >> I salute the decision of going with D2, as well as that of using the >> Boost license. If there is anything in the language that prevents you >> from getting things done, please let us know. The availability of QtD >> concurrently with that of D2 will hopefully push both forward. > > I don't get why Boost license should be used. It's just confusing to have > yet another free for all license as it basically promises the same things > as the 2-clause BSD or MIT license. The only difference I see is that the > author of a Boost licensed software publicly admits that he is a Boost > fanboy and thinks the license somehow got better after his personal > deities rewrote it from scratch with NIH mentality.
Speaking purely (and proudly) as a non-lawyer: For being only three paragraphs long, the Boost license is amazingly obtuse. The first two paragraphs are made up of one full-paragraph-sized sentence each, and in a style that's the written-word equivilent of constipation (kinda like how my dad explains things: keeps talking and yet somehow never gets to the ^&**& point.) Then the third paragraph, of course, is every laywer's big stiffy: the ALL CAPS paragraph.
