On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 21:20:43 +0100, Sérgio Martins wrote:

> Please state your top ones, even if it was already stated by someone
> else, so we have an idea about which ones matter more.

a) C++ ( far beyond everything else )

The 2 language approach is a pain. In our application we have thousands 
of totally pointless lines of code only for bridging between C++ libs and 
QML. Having a compact syntax - for code, that would be trivial in C++ as 
well - IMO simply doesn't justify this extra work.

Beside that QML has bad instantiation times for large projects and its 
concept of item composition makes applications heavy. More than 30 
QObjects for a button ( Quick Control 1 ) says it all.

My experience with working on C++ controls with an optional QML API shows 
how surprisingly easy it would have been to have both APIs. Too sad, that 
with Qt Quick Control 2 this chance has been missed.

b) Vector graphics

Qt has no strategy for handling vector graphics - neither Widgets nor Qt 
Quick. Not having full featured layout classes ( dynamic constraints etc 
) are another problem, when trying to implement user interfaces, that 
need to work on different devices.

c) Compatibility policies

The compatibility policy of Qt makes it impossible to fix design problems 
of X.0 versions. This leads to adding balconies instead of getting the 
foundations stable.

F.e. have a look at the font/locale propagation. It obviously has been 
identified as being forgotten and has been added to QQuickControl ( Quick 
controls 2 ) - instead of QQuickItem.

In consequence Qt Quick Control 2 does not play together with controls of 
other libs ( and v.v ).

e) X11 paint engine

Being the maintainer of the Qwt project I'm missing a hardware 
accelerated paint engine, that just works.


In general I would like to see Qt being more focused on what it is good 
at - for me this is cross platform desktop development ( Qt/Widgets ) and 
Qt Embedded projects - not Android/iOS.

A a long term goal I would also like to see desktop and embedded 
technologies being reunited. Even if user interfaces on desktop and for 
embedded are ( and probably will stay ) different I don't see why writing 
them needs to be totally different.

My 2 cents,



Interest mailing list

Reply via email to