On Thursday 08 September 2011 13:25:10 Nilsen Bjorn (Nokia-MP-Qt/Oslo) wrote:
> On 9/8/11 12:59 PM, ext Peter Kuemmel wrote:
> > JS in QtCore is not needed in headless embedded software.
> > But it would be a reason to not use Qt in such a project if JS couldn't be 
> > disabled.
> >
> 
> Exactly. It would be a good reason to not use *Qt5* in such a project. 
> Qt4 is more suitable for that use case.

People want to use an actively developed and maintained version of Qt for 
their projects - Gui or non-Gui. A significant part of the Qt 5 effort is also 
to fix things that could not be fixed in Qt 4 for "compatibility reasons". 

Staying at Qt 4 will not be a _long-term_ option for actively developed 
projects, pretty much as staying with Qt 3 has not been an option for
most of the Qt projects that have survived the last decade.

> > I think "Core" is a the wrong name for a library with a complete JS 
> > interpreter/jit compiler.
> > Maybe it is possible to introduce an additional library (QtMicroCore?)
> > a level below QtCore which really has only core functionality: signal slot,
> > reflection, QString, ... but absolutely nothing gui related (QSize, QPoint,
> > QState*, QAnimationGroup, QTranslation, ...)
> >
> 
> With the vision of Qt5 fresh in mind, it makes perfectly sense to move 
> JS into QtCore. It *is* the core of all Qt5 applications.

That vision is far from being universally shared.

Andre'

[Not speaking for my employer etc.]


_______________________________________________
Qt5-feedback mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback

Reply via email to