I didnt compared Qt with boost also I said in the mail that comparing Qt with FOX is not fair. Please read the mail carefully and answer.I am going to develop an apllication which need to work on web and desktop.First I prefered Qt as I know it better. But porting Qt desktop apps for web is a tough job.
I prefered FOX because I need to make my base classes dependent on just c++. I can do it If i choose Qt. so I switched to FOX. FOX has only gui so If I use FOX I can do only GUI part of programming using FOX other than Qt. All other arts dependent on C++ or some other libs. To make a web application from desktop apps (If I am using FOX) I need to replace GUI part. Is this possible on Qt. AFAIK there is no such toolkits which can do web as well as desktop programming. Also there are many choices like python,ruby php for web. But using C++ I can code on web and desktop.If I use FOX fox desktop I have witty for web which doesnt need any HTML,css,javascript/AJAX code. All we need is witty code. It is logically possible to do such an application. that is using MVC keeping M-C constant and changing the view for web and desktop. I can create the core classes in C++ only and inherit them for both web and desktop. The project is not done yet also i never tried it. But hopes this is possible :) Everyone have their own choices of programming language and toolkit and As I said in the first mail it depends on the project we need to do choose toolkit. Its better than sticking on a single toolkit/framewrok for everything. Als I said in the 1st mail that these are only my opinion and I didnt force anyone to use any programming language and toolkits/frameworks ... :) On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Rajeev J Sebastian < [email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Mohammed Rashad > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ok, Qt doesn't force but as you said if we want the ease of use of Qt we > > need to use its own modules. > > But remember some Qt modules are not highly optimized when compared with > > other opensource modules > > as i said. OODBC cross-platform for database is better that Qt's and any > > others database module. > > FOX is only a GUI Toolkit but Qt is a complete framework. comparing a > > framework with toolkit is not fair. > > But I vote for FOX than Qt because FOX allows to code in our own way > without > > any generated code unlike Qt > > and Qt has problems in different versions. Qt 2 is different from Qt3 and > > both are entirely different from Qt4 > > that is a problem of portability.We need to rewrite some parts of Qt3 > code > > to work in Qt4 > > But for FOX I can compile the code I had written using version1 on using > > latest version.So that I can run the code written for windows95 in > window7 ! > > Advantages: > > > > - Written in C++, not C. > > > > - Relatively flat learning curve due to very consistent naming, > > widget creation parameters, and so on. > > > > - Fast. > > > > - Easy to make custom widgets. > > > > - NOT a wrapper around some other toolkit. You can really override > > the way a widget works by subclassing and reimplementing > behaviour > > and how it is drawn. > > > > - Written with a consistent vision of how things should fit > together: > > > > "Lego blocks" for GUI's: make things work by fitting them > together, > > preferably with no "glue code" having to be written. > > > > > > There are of course a few disadvantages: > > > > - No major corporation behind FOX. So, resources are a bit > > constrained. > > > > - Internationalization and Localization are still being worked on. > > > > > > Nevertheless, its functional, and has been used to make some pretty large > > (thousands > > and thousands of controls) applications; whatever else one can say, > > scalability isn't > > going to be the issue. > > > > > > You list of advantages is absolutely correct for Qt too, without the > disadvantages :P > > Also, talking about source compatibility is kind of weird. Very very > few people care that the code they write on Qt 2 will compile on Qt4. > It's like asking for code that compiles on TurboC++ IDE should be > compilable with GCC. > > Maybe FOX developers don't have the time to improve their code or > maybe they don't care to continually make it easier to code against > their API, and consequently change their APIs. Qt on the other hand > has continually improved over the years, added a *ton* of features, > improved their documentation, improved performance, made their APIs > easier, etc. > > About "Qt modules not optimized" is a misleading statement. > Performance is a result of writing code, finding bottlenecks and > mitigating them. Just because OODBC or whatever is more "performant" > in whatever which way, doesnt mean that your code will run any faster. > Similiar arguments always come up in the context of Python too, but > that doesn't stop python developers developing more performant code in > some cases than the equivalent written in C/C++. In general, this > "back to bare metal" arguments are misleading, because in most > projects the time and effort of developing a piece of software > outweighs gaining a 1% improvement in performance. Since the OP wants > to develop something for his college project, I hardly think thats > going to be a problem. > > Also, I honestly do not think OODBC is any better than Qt's Database > API. Qt's proper types and data structures make it a pleasure to do db > code in C++. > > Finally, you first compare boost with Qt, then compare FOX with Qt. > I'd say you're the one making unfair comparisons :D > > > Regards > Rajeev J Sebastian > > -- > "Freedom is the only law". > "Freedom Unplugged" > http://www.ilug-tvm.org > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "ilug-tvm" group. > To control your subscription visit > http://groups.google.co.in/group/ilug-tvm/subscribe > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > > > > For details visit the google group page: > http://groups.google.com/group/ilug-tvm?hl=en > -- Rashad -- "Freedom is the only law". "Freedom Unplugged" http://www.ilug-tvm.org You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ilug-tvm" group. To control your subscription visit http://groups.google.co.in/group/ilug-tvm/subscribe To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For details visit the google group page: http://groups.google.com/group/ilug-tvm?hl=en
