On 18 September 2016 at 21:56, Bob Hood <bho...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 9/18/2016 2:43 AM, Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote:
>> Some things that bother me :
>> * Features being QML-only instead of being usable from C++. I like coding
>> in C++ (but I agree it's hard).
> This is certainly arguable.  For some, I guess coding in C++ is hard.  For
> others, it's as natural as breathing.
> In fact, it leads to my particular issue: QML.  I waited a long time for
> Qt to reach a point where it was usable for mobile development, and I
> personally was disappointed with the declarative approach taken with QML.
> Aside from being somewhat out of character for the framework, it seems to
> have been a divisive approach, creating a separation not only between
> interface and code, but between languages!  Jean-Michaël's point
> abovehighlights that.
> I want to code mobile in a language I use on a daily basis for things
> other than just mobile.  I realize it is a great fit for some people, but
> unfortunately for me, QML isn't.  I've therefore had to turn my attention
> to Xamarin (especially now that it is integrated into Visual Studio).  I've
> never been much of a fan of C#, but it is certainly closer to C++ than QML.
> (No QML flame wars, please.  I'm just expressing my personal situation,
> not saying that QML isn't useful for some people.)
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Personally I don't mind to code in two languages. I would treat QML as an
interface builder language. (e.g the old .ui file or those xml files in
Android) But the hard problem is on the data sharing model between C++ and
QML/JS. QAbstractItemModel is an overkill solution. Many people may instead
chose QObjectListModel for sharing data. But I have too many bad experience
with it. It is too easy to crash and difficult to trace the problem.
Interest mailing list

Reply via email to