This thread started here, http://lists.qt.nokia.com/pipermail/qt5-feedback/2011-May/000042.html
and this post is a reply on the mail below: http://lists.qt.nokia.com/pipermail/qt5-feedback/2011-May/000228.html On 18.05.2011 12:14, André Pönitz wrote: > On Tuesday 17 May 2011 21:42:42 ext Peter Kümmel wrote: >> [...] >> "usable for both Qt and Qt Creator" is qmake good enough for this only? > > While qmake works for Qt and Qt Creator, it does not really work _well_ > for either. From an IDE point of view It does not (easily) give access > to functionality like "rebuild this translation unit only", or "run this file > through the preprocessor" and other interesting features. It's also not > easy to set up inter-project dependencies, "configure" the project, > it does not provide fast round trips when only one file changes etc. > So there is a lot room for potential improvements. Wouldn't it be best to have no external build system at all and to fire all moc, gcc, calls from qtcreator directly? Then it is not hard to build only one file. You also could hold a hash of each file which would speedup turn-around times alot. A build system would only be required when you wanna use the "q5make pro" files in the shell without qtcreator. The same code base would be within a qtcreator-plugin and linked statically into q5make. > > But I really don't want that discussion here, right now. It's not exactly a > "Qt 5" issue, and we have enough naked flames around already. qmake will > be available in Qt 5, whether there will be anything else in addition, and if > so in what time frame remains to be seen. > > I would prefer to talk about the issue at the Contributors' Summit or Still a chance to get invited? > maybe handle the IDE related aspects on [email protected]. Peter _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
