On Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:03:55 +0200, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote: > This is another blatant false statement, because you can port just the > parts of Qt that you need, and even those can be further trimmed down > using the feature system. (That's actually how you would do a port in > the first place.)
While I agree with almost everything of your posting I don't do with this one: Qt/Quick has gone into the direction of Web technologies and you can't change this by simply disabling some features. This goes much deeper and has to do with the philosophy/mindset behind the product. Have a look at https://www.qt.io/qt-vs-html-5-strengths-and-weaknesses. There is nothing wrong with these articles, but "four to eight times lower RAM requirements" than a beast like HTML5 does not put Qt into a different category. Actually we were so disappointed ( learning it the hard way with a project using QML ) about the direction Qt has taken, that we finally started our own framework on top of ~ QuickItem/QQuickWindow ( https:// github.com/uwerat/qskinny ). Uwe PS: would be nice to have a feature to get rid of all QML related members/ interfaces of QQuickItem/QQuickWindow _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest