> Might be the case but then who said the software emulation in question cannot be based on QPainter? We have QQuickPaintedItem, for instance.
I'd like to see it before I believe it - for instance I know that at least on my software, using a QOpenGLViewport-backed QGraphicsView is quite slower and more laggy than a CPU-rendered one, consistently, on macOS, windows and linux (and I have a fairly good GPU). > Qt Quick Controls have no animations by default but QQC 1 is deprecated. And QQC 2 has animations by default - I invite you to go to QtCreator and press File / New project / Qt application / Qt Quick Application - Swipe and interact with it. > just because of a small number of corner cases. these really aren't that small in my experience. Also, no tree view -> no go for a *lot* of technical apps. On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 8:06 PM Dimitar Dobrev <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10.12.18 20:58, Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > > In my experience QPainter is quite faster than LLVMPipe or other > > openGL software rendering solutions. > Might be the case but then who said the software emulation in question > cannot be based on QPainter? We have QQuickPaintedItem, for instance. > > > Also, Qt Widgets does not have as many fancy animations / tweening > > everywhere by default that would make stuff slower. > Qt Quick Controls have no animations by default except possibly native > ones (in 1). > > If we look at the other UI toolkits, WPF which is also > > scene-graph-backed has a lot of cases where it fallbacks to software > > for instance : > Exactly - we don't need to get stuck with a framework as old as Widgets > just because of a small number of corner cases. > >
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
