OK, I'm going to stick my oar in again. :)
QMake certainly has its quirks and the more advanced functionality
isn't well documented, but it can do pretty much all I need - what I
am asking for is for QtCreator to hide all these quirks and weirdness
and allow me to set dependencies, execute pre-build/post-build steps,
etc. without being exposed to the QMake internals. At the end of the
day I really don't care what make system is under the hood. Take
Visual Studio (sorry but it's where me a lot of your target audience
is coming form) - I can set dependencies, add pre-build steps,
post-build steps, custom build rules, etc. without ever having to edit
.sln or .vcproj files by hand. The annoying thing is that all these
things are possible with QMake but are so hard to get going that
people are going to give up and stick to using the Qt MSVC plugins.
This can't be helpful.
Sessions don't work in my world - let's say you have a project that
contains 3 exe's and 5 libs. A member of your team wants to work on a
project - are they seriously meant to check out a copy and then load
each .pro file by hand, setting dependencies using the Project
settings. etc. until their 'session' is up and running? Come on!
With a SUBDIRS project you just load up the master .pro file and bam!
All your sub-projects get dragged in. Ctrl+B and you're off and
running.
And what I also like about SUBDIRS/QMake is your command-line based
build system isn't much more complicated than:
qmake master.pro
mingw32-make release
Brilliant!
So, whether QMake gets superseded or not is a moot point to me. I
want to get away from Visual Studio and QtCreator is a dream come true
- going that extra mile and adding some UI fluff for people like me
who don't want to edit .pro files and you cannot lose.
2009/9/24 Oswald Buddenhagen <[email protected]>:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 11:15:42AM -0500, Coda Highland wrote:
>> That said, you tempt me. Oh, you tempt me. :P
>>
> have fun. ;)
>
>> I'd still like to see the replacement tool be as easy to use and
>> extend as qmake; cmake is a serious pain but the KDE zealots are so...
>> zealous. :P
>>
> that's an interesting statement for me. because i made the exact
> opposite experience - just have a look at the pro files in
> creator/share/* .
> but then, maybe that's because i'm a kde zealot. ;)
> (and no, i don't like cmake files - they look arcane).
>
>> I'm sad to hear that the Trolls themselves don't like qmake.
>>
> not all of them. actually, there are only two rather small groups who
> seriously dislike it: those who have to use it for serious stuff and
> those who maintain it. ok, so by all practical means, that's the same
> group. :D
> but there is a reason why it hasn't been documented through all these
> years ...
>
>> I've been defending it for years because it really IS one of the best
>> tools out there for the typical project.
>>
> well, as far as i'm concerned, that's not exactly a reassuring verdict
> regarding the build tool landscape as a whole. which we happen to agree
> with ... :}
> _______________________________________________
> Qt-creator mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
>
_______________________________________________
Qt-creator mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
