21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>:
> Hey, there is a lot of interesting points in all these answers; some 
> similars, some not.
> Maybe a good way forward would be to try to pinpoint the problems more 
> precisely with an online platform such
> as http://en.arguman.org/ ? Or even just some kind of google doc...

I think wiki page would be a better alternative.

> Starting from there would maybe make it easier for the Qt devs to weigh the 
> "for" and "against" for the stuff that is often mentioned ?

I doubt anyone here is going to weigh anything besides patches submitted to 

> Instead of having to find specific arguments in 45 mails...  And then open 
> some paths for contributions to try to alleviate the problems.
> My 0.0005 cents
> Best
> Jean-Michaël
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wrote:
>>> I also can't help making a comparison with two other popular layout
>>> frameworks: WPF/XAML, and Android/AXML. In both of these worlds, the markup
>>> language and the "code-behind" class hierarchy of UI elements are
>>> absolutely equivalent 1st class citizens. Anything you can do in XAML, you
>>> can also do in the C# code-behind, whether it be creating controls,
>>> changing their properties, altering layouts, etc. Likewise in Android/AXML,
>>> I can (if I choose) create FrameLayouts, RelativeLayouts, TextViews, etc in
>>> code, and arrange them and manipulate them any way I like, as an
>>> alternative to creating an AXML designer layout.
>>> It seems unfortunate that Qt Quick doesn't take this approach, and that the
>>> "code-behind" experience is so limited. One reason that I've heard why it
>>> might have been done this way is that a rich and fully public C++ interface
>>> may have hamstrung the developers too much, as there would be constant
>>> breaking changes from one release to the next. If that's true then I guess
>>> I understand that, but I would still rather put up with a rich C++
>>> interface that had breaking changes at new releases, than the relative
>>> limited C++ interface we have now.
>> I'm not sure I follow. Declarituce UI is in. QML, React (+JSX)  give you 
>> decaritive layouts. It convergent evolution of stucture±properties+code
>> XAML, WPF, Qt Widgets all have structure and properties but no code.  You've 
>> got to create the objects then in another context, assign code to them.
>> If you are taking about how QQuickItems wrap C++ my understanding is that's 
>> because of the scene graph. My perspective is that the C++ side is better 
>> before I'm always having to drop from QML to C++ to expose stuff for QML. So 
>> I really don't understand your issue?
>> _______________________________________________
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest@qt-project.org
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
> ,
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Interest mailing list

Reply via email to