Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Guenter Schwann]

On Tuesday, April 05, 2016 05:18:08 PM Emre Besirik wrote:
> Some of the lacking features are smart autocomplete maybe

At least with QtCreator 4.0 beta most issues are resolved for me.
What exactly do you mean by "smart"?

> Ctrl+K like search but improved in a better UI
I watched https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7nT9QWjOBA

Nothing stunning there. Mostly the same as Ctrl-K (you see more options the 
poping up). Some are Ctrl-Tab, Ctrl-Shift-I, Ctrl-Shift-T.

Is there something like Alt-Left for CLion?

> but most lacking part comes in UI/UX

I like QtCreator because it doesn't come with a bloated UI (in constrast to 
Visual Studio).
The UI is very lightweight. Close to a simple editor. But as soon as you know 
some shortcuts, it gets extremely powerful.
Maybe you should have a look at https://www.kdab.com/qtcreator


And again - which technology or trends do you think QtCreator is _eons_ 
behind?

Regards
Guenter

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Guenter Schwann]

On Tuesday, April 05, 2016 04:19:42 PM NoMercy wrote:
> That QtCreator is eons behind current technology and trends, isn't it very
> obvious?

No! Absolutely not.
QtCreator is a really great IDE. Very lightweight, but still very powerful.
Simply using the "Esc" button is a single fantastic feature that I haven't 
seen elsewhere.

And for the technology: CLion as well as QtCreator are using clang for the 
code model (which is the heart of an IDE).
What other technology do you mean?

What trends do you see for IDEs?

> I would say just checkout features of ANY JetBrains product but
> you don't even intend to so you are in therefor denial. (Not personally you
> but many people who are objecting these)

I haven't used it yet - granted. But I have watched all the CLion releases so 
far.
They are looking promising. But I haven't seen any major feature that 
QtCreator would lack (C++ only).

I guess you haven't read the manual of QtCreator. So you missed tons of 
features.

And yes, QtCreator is not perfect. Especially the clang code model still needs 
polishing (speed is not up to the old model).
QtCreator 4.0 (beta) is looking really nice :)

Regards
Günter

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Alexey Rusakov]

I don't know what I'm doing wrong but the new compile-time-checked syntax is 
auto-completed by my Qt Creator (that came with Qt 5.5.1) as well :) and you're 
a bit blunt on not recommending the older syntax. Apparently you haven't spent 
enough time with QML.





On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:41 AM -0700, "Nikos Chantziaras"  
wrote:










It only works with the old, Qt4 string/macro-based syntax (using the 
SLOT and SIGNAL macros.) Which is totally unsafe and I don't use it 
anymore (I wouldn't even recommend it to anyone.) The new syntax, which 
is statically checked (compile time) and thus type-safe, even though 
it's the recommended one by Qt, is not supported in Creator using the 
clang model. This does not auto-complete:

   connect(this, &MyWidget::mySignal, control, &MyControl::mySlot);

This is not the end of the world, but still it's unpleasant to work with.

The clang code model will get better in the future, I'm sure of it. But 
right now, it's pain all the way down.

The lacking auto-completion might not even be the worst of it. In the 
end, that's "just" a productivity and convenience issue. The lack of 
reliable "find all uses" in the clang model is actually a more serious 
problem, since if you trust it you're left with the false sense of 
security that you caught all the places in your code where a symbol was 
used and made whatever changes you needed to make to fix an issue. But 
it doesn't find all uses. Which is *dangerous*. So I have to do a 
text-based, project-wide search for a string instead to actually get to 
all uses of the symbol and update my code.


On 04/04/16 11:42, Alexey Rusakov wrote:
> Not sure what I'm doing wrong but auto-completion for connect() does
> work for me. Moreover, I don't expect CLion to be able to work with
> SIGNAL() and SLOT() notation without Qt-aware plugin.
>
> I might expect CLion to rule them all in some indefinite future but very
> hardly at the moment. Disclaimer: I am a switch-over from CLion to Qt
> Creator, exactly because Qt Creator worked for me much better than CLion
> for CMake-based Qt-using projects.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:13 AM -0700, "Nikos Chantziaras"
> > wrote:
>
> On 03/04/16 22:00, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > On domingo, 3 de abril de 2016 21:07:00 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:
> >> Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like 
> me?
> >> Does Qt plan to do something about this?
> >
> > It would be more constructive if you explained what your issues are and 
> what
> > you findto be unpleasant. Without that, nothing is ever going to happen.
>
> I assume the same things as the rest of us, perhaps:
>
> * Lack of auto-completion for connect().
> * Very slow auto-completion.
> * Generally auto-completion sometimes work, sometimes doesn't.
> * "Find uses" doesn't work, so you have to grep to find uses.
> * It gets very confused with smart pointers and templates in general.
> * Sometimes doesn't highlight local uses.
>
> This is the clang code model, and these things are a major PITA.
>
> The Creator code model was excellent for C++98. The last few months, I
> complete switched my projects to C++14, and that code model is now
> useless, so clang is the only choice. And it's not very pleasant to work
> with. In fact, I'd say it's very unpleasant.
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Alexey Rusakov]

Not sure what I'm doing wrong but auto-completion for connect() does work for 
me. Moreover, I don't expect CLion to be able to work with SIGNAL() and SLOT() 
notation without Qt-aware plugin.
I might expect CLion to rule them all in some indefinite future but very hardly 
at the moment. Disclaimer: I am a switch-over from CLion to Qt Creator, exactly 
because Qt Creator worked for me much better than CLion for CMake-based 
Qt-using projects.




On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:13 AM -0700, "Nikos Chantziaras"  
wrote:










On 03/04/16 22:00, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On domingo, 3 de abril de 2016 21:07:00 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:
>> Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me?
>> Does Qt plan to do something about this?
>
> It would be more constructive if you explained what your issues are and what
> you findto be unpleasant. Without that, nothing is ever going to happen.

I assume the same things as the rest of us, perhaps:

* Lack of auto-completion for connect().
* Very slow auto-completion.
* Generally auto-completion sometimes work, sometimes doesn't.
* "Find uses" doesn't work, so you have to grep to find uses.
* It gets very confused with smart pointers and templates in general.
* Sometimes doesn't highlight local uses.

This is the clang code model, and these things are a major PITA.

The Creator code model was excellent for C++98. The last few months, I 
complete switched my projects to C++14, and that code model is now 
useless, so clang is the only choice. And it's not very pleasant to work 
with. In fact, I'd say it's very unpleasant.

___
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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Alejandro Exojo]

El Wednesday 06 April 2016, André Somers escribió:
> Op 05/04/2016 om 22:47 schreef Alejandro Exojo:
> > El Tuesday 05 April 2016, André Somers escribió:
> >> That works, but it is not as flexible as what we see in those gifs. For
> >> instance, you cannot move the cursor left or right or make the same edit
> >> on multiple lines that are not vertically aligned.
> > 
> > That's what you miss for not using FakeVim. ;-)
> 
> That might very well be it. :-)
> 
> So... the FakeVim can do that trick?

Yes. FakeVim implements the repeat command (.) quite well, and it also 
implements the "search keyword under the cursor" (*). That means that 
repeating such actions is typically:

*  (search that keyword)
 (edit and get back to normal mode)
n.n.n.  (search again and do the previous edit)

There are tons of other variants. Of course FakeVim is not as nice as the real 
vim because it doesn't have some of its extensibility, but obviously vim falls 
short in many other things. I tend to use the two.

-- 
Alex (a.k.a. suy) | GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ | http://disperso.net
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Konstantin Tokarev]

07.04.2016, 20:26, "Shantanu Tushar" :
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 7:08 PM, NoMercy  wrote:
>> I totally disagree with you here, JB products are way faster in code 
>> completion for instance and WY smarter...
>
> He was talking about load times and stuff. I've used a couple of JetBrains 
> products at work (PyCharm, Rubymine) and they are damn slow (compared to 
> native IDEs like Creator or VS) to load and eat memory like I eat cakes. 
> You're right when you say that JetBrains products are way smarter (after all, 
> thats what their whole business model is about), but Nuno is right about the 
> load times.

Well, if you compare with NetBeans, Idea is quite fast :)

>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Nuno Santos  wrote:
 On 05 Apr 2016, at 14:19, NoMercy  wrote:

 people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator 
 (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)
>>> Sorry to interfere here but I couldn’t read this without sharing my 
>>> thoughts. Qt Creator is simply the most straightforward IDE around.
>>>
>>> All IDE based in Java simply suck because they are all slow like a turtle. 
>>> I personally hate any kind of Java based software because of the 
>>> performance impact.
>>>
>>> It is also a paradox a JET brain software using Java to support it. A JET 
>>> brain cannot wait for Java to render. :)
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
> --
> Shantanu Tushar    (UTC +0530)
> shantanu.io
> ,
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest


-- 
Regards,
Konstantin
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Shantanu Tushar]

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 7:08 PM, NoMercy  wrote:

> I totally disagree with you here, JB products are way faster in code
> completion for instance and WY smarter...
>

He was talking about load times and stuff. I've used a couple of JetBrains
products at work (PyCharm, Rubymine) and they are damn slow (compared to
native IDEs like Creator or VS) to load and eat memory like I eat cakes.
You're right when you say that JetBrains products are way smarter (after
all, thats what their whole business model is about), but Nuno is right
about the load times.


> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Nuno Santos 
> wrote:
>
>> On 05 Apr 2016, at 14:19, NoMercy  wrote:
>>
>> people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from
>> QtCreator (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)
>>
>>
>> Sorry to interfere here but I couldn’t read this without sharing my
>> thoughts. Qt Creator is simply the most straightforward IDE around.
>>
>> All IDE based in Java simply suck because they are all slow like a
>> turtle. I personally hate any kind of Java based software because of the
>> performance impact.
>>
>> It is also a paradox a JET brain software using Java to support it. A JET
>> brain cannot wait for Java to render. :)
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>


-- 
Shantanu Tushar(UTC +0530)
shantanu.io
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Somers]

Op 06/04/2016 om 15:44 schreef Diego Iastrubni:


This is not trivial to implement in QTextEditor, since it has a single 
QCursor (a deep dependency, which cannot be changed quite easily.  Or 
can it...?


Perhaps it is me, but I think QTextCursor is designed for this purpose? 
You can create many on the same document. And QCursor is a class to deal 
with the mouse pointer, not text cursors.


André

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Diego Iastrubni]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Thiago Macieira 
wrote:

> On terça-feira, 5 de abril de 2016 10:05:07 PDT Julius Bullinger wrote:
> > On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > >>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its
> > >>epic,
> > >>and Atom badly implements it),
> > >
> > > Explain. Sounds intriguing.
> >
> > It's better shown than explained, see e.g.
> > http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif and
> >
> https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc0f4562
> > 034.gif for examples.
>
> Interesting. I'd have worked around the issue by selecting the block and
> telling Creator to replace "var " with "var _".
>
>
This feature is capable of doing more: each cursor you see on screen, has
it's own clipboard. What I usually use it for is:

1) take a CSV string and paste it into the editor
2) select, and inside the selection search for ","
3) create multiple cursors from the selections
4) press "del" - now list is line separated list.
5) now press control+left to select the previous word, copy it
6) press "up" and "paste"
7) now each line has the last word of the previous line.
8) now press "home" and type ""
9) press "end" and type ""
10) remember that undo works also on all cursors

Hard to explain in pure text... VIM users will tell you this is doable from
the editor since "ages", but it's not trivial to learn.

This is not trivial to implement in QTextEditor, since it has a single
QCursor (a deep dependency, which cannot be changed quite easily.  Or can
it...?
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 06 Apr 2016, at 12:18, André Somers  wrote:
>> 
>> What I’m trying to say is; non of us here are a UI/UX expert, right?
> 
> I would not make such assumptions out of hand... Do you know who is 
> subscribed here, and who is working on QtC?

Well yes I can not know for sure but I’m betting on it. if I’m wrong then I’ll 
apologise about this...

> 
>> so whatever we add as feature requests to the bug report system will only 
>> maybe add some new functionality but will not improve User Experience, am I 
>> correct?
> 
> Wrong. The UX of an application is defined by its design and its features, 
> and how the these interact. So, indicating where there are issues with these 
> so they can be addressed will help the UX. UX is not some secret sause to be 
> poured over an application when the coding is done (or something you can only 
> work on before you start coding). 

Please see my reply to Jean-Michaël Celerier on this subject.

> 
>> QtC simply needs help from an expert on the subject...
> That is the kind of useless statement people here become annoyed about. Point 
> out the problems before you start assuming that outside help is needed to 
> address these as of yet unknown problems.

Again my reply to Jean-Michaël Celerier


Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Somers]

Op 05/04/2016 om 22:47 schreef Alejandro Exojo:

El Tuesday 05 April 2016, André Somers escribió:

That works, but it is not as flexible as what we see in those gifs. For
instance, you cannot move the cursor left or right or make the same edit
on multiple lines that are not vertically aligned.

That's what you miss for not using FakeVim. ;-)


That might very well be it. :-)

So... the FakeVim can do that trick?

André
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Alejandro Exojo]

El Tuesday 05 April 2016, André Somers escribió:
> That works, but it is not as flexible as what we see in those gifs. For 
> instance, you cannot move the cursor left or right or make the same edit 
> on multiple lines that are not vertically aligned.

That's what you miss for not using FakeVim. ;-)

-- 
Alex (a.k.a. suy) | GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ | http://disperso.net
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

>> it only searches for filenames
> 
> Utter nonsense.

Well ok even it does not do it as good as JB products I’ll accept this but 
watch the video link I’ve sent if you had time, you’ll then see what I actually 
mean

> 
>> You only offer mostly workarounds which are not the same. debugging values 
>> for
>> instance; yes we can also see the values in the debug windows if we’d like to
>> but its not the same, when it is shown inline you just need to look no other
>> action required.
> 
> There's a global option somewhere to get debugger tooltips in the editor.
> I.e. also wrong.

tooltips require you to reach your mouse and go over things wait etc..

> 
>> QtCreator compared to modern IDEs.  A good IDE (I think) should avoid to make
>> its users have to take their hand off the keyboard to reach the mouse or
>> touchpad as much as possible, to do this you should have a perfect keybord
>> shortcut system, which also should avoid to make its users to have multiple
>> keystrokes (double esc and then something more etc.) Jetbrains products are
>> really engineered very well on their UI/UX part, if we can not have/afford an
> 
> I'd really like you to not use the word 'we' in this discussion. It feels
> highly inappropriate in combination with your tone.

I’m saying “we” because I\m also trying to use Qt, I’m also trying to make 
things better instead of denying room for improvement. And about my tone, I 
really don’t get it when critisim is always perceived as “tone”?

> 
>> experienced UI/UX team of professionals then at least we should inspect what
>> they (jetbrains and/or others) have done and learn from them then apply to
>> QtCreator maybe?
> 
> I don't really get your intention here. You are obviously successful at
> trolling. You also made clear you found an IDE you are happy with, and you
> despise Qt Creator. Still, you reach out to this supposedly unenlightened 
> crowd
> and ask them to clone your idol?

Well to be honest CLion does not have full support for Qt yet and I’d love to 
use that if it had. You sound like QtC is your child I’m insulting him/her? You 
maybe one of the QtC Devs but you don’t necessarily lose your dignity if you 
are not a good designer? you don’t have to be… you are a developer and that is 
a completely different profession on its own. I don’t understand why people 
gets so offended even it is not about you or your work?
I bet QtC simply hasn’t been touched by ANY UI/UX expert to this day and thats 
the problem, and thats all, there is nothing to get offended about this at all 
even if you are one of the developers.

> 
> Please? Why don't you just stick to what you are happy with? 

The problem is; what I’m happy with does not exist yet...

> 
> If you really wanted to be helpful, as in rightfully using the word "we",
> you could have filed feature requests on bugreports.qt-project.org 
> . Sure,
> some of them might have triggered an immediate 'Invalid' resolution, but
> in the end some valid points will have survived, and some of these even
> would have been fixed.
> 
See my previous posts about bugreport, it is not enough, you can not make a 
feature req. saying; “Please have an experienced team of UI/UX experts to go 
through all of QtC and make a complete makeover” ?


Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com ___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Jean-Michaël Celerier]

It's standard C++ code.
(That I had to wait 5 minutes for to show up vs 2 seconds in QtC :) )

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:09 PM, Emre Besirik  wrote:

>
> On 05 Apr 2016, at 22:03, Jean-Michaël Celerier <
> jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Emre Besirik  wrote:
>
>> a complete makeover to match current IDE standarts
>
>
> Example of code coloration for some code of mine in QtCreator :
> 
> ​
>
> And in CLion :
> 
> ​
> Of course, nothing auto-completes in CLion...
>
>
> CLion doesn’t officially support Qt yet? besides I’m not just talking
> about code coloring?
>
> Regards,
> Emre Beşirik
> nome...@gmail.com
>
>
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Somers]

Op 05/04/2016 om 12:05 schreef Julius Bullinger:

On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:

9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic,
and Atom badly implements it),

Explain. Sounds intriguing.

It's better shown than explained, see e.g. http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif 
and 
https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc0f4562034.gif
 for examples.

This is the only feature I'm really missing in Qt Creator, and the reason I 
keep Sublime open besides Creator all the time.
There's pretty basic multi-cursor functionality in Creator, but it's not quite 
as polished as Sublime's. Really, you need to try yourself to see how useful it 
is!

I like it, and added a feature request for it: 
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTCREATORBUG-16013


André
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On terça-feira, 5 de abril de 2016 10:05:07 PDT Julius Bullinger wrote:
> On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> >>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its
> >>epic,
> >>and Atom badly implements it),
> > 
> > Explain. Sounds intriguing.
> 
> It's better shown than explained, see e.g.
> http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif and
> https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc0f4562
> 034.gif for examples.

Interesting. I'd have worked around the issue by selecting the block and 
telling Creator to replace "var " with "var _".

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

>> I do not always use the same mail client and even though I try to clean up
>> things, as I am a simply human, I may forget to do somethings occasionally.
>> And about the top-posting; thats really an argument belong to entirely
>> different thread on its own. don’t get me started on the anti-topposting
>> obsession/top-post allergy of people here please… And even though its not
>> only me doing these “mistakes” you only seem to attack me over these, I’m
>> wondering why...
> 
> Maybe others don’t.

You are definitely wrong here, I’ve seen many...

> 
>>> On which real data are just "statistics" based? Seeing many discussions in
>>> this list as well as privately I doubt the validity of your numbers.
>> 
>> No real data actually but mere observations, don’t need any real data. its
>> just my personal opinion, I do not claim to now for sure.
> 
> That tells a big story.
> We do not need facts, we have an opinion.
> 
> Please go trolling somewhere else.

Why do some of you guys keep accusing people for trolling? Why do you deny 
improvement? Besides what you have is no more than your opinion too.. Am I 
wrong? You have your opinion based on your observations, I have mine. What 
makes yours the correct opinion? You are just trying to attack without any 
purpose, just accusing me for things that I don’t or things that I’m not. You 
don’t add any value to this thread, only baseless acusations.

Please only talk if you have something about the subject and keep your 
accusations to your self. You are contaminating this thread.

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Somers]

Op 05/04/2016 om 18:03 schreef Nikita Krupenko:

2016-04-05 18:11 GMT+03:00 Curtis Mitch :

The GIF seemed to demonstrate some kind of selective editing. I just tried this 
with the block selection in Creator and it just overwrites the text. Can you 
give an example of how you can achieve what's done in the GIF using block 
selection in Creator?

Just select zero-width block with Alt and you'll get big cursor where
you can enter some text (i.e. insert without replacing).

That works, but it is not as flexible as what we see in those gifs. For 
instance, you cannot move the cursor left or right or make the same edit 
on multiple lines that are not vertically aligned.


It seems that the examples show something like that, and that would be 
quite powerfull.


André
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> In other words, CLion is eons behind Qt Creator in Qt support.

no definetly not saying that, at least not yet ofcourse, I’m saying is as an 
IDE CLion is a better IDE. I’m not using CLion for my Qt dev, I still am using 
QtC, its just I’m craving for UI/UX and some other things from the likes of 
CLion in QtC. I’m craving for the joy I get when I code Java in Intellij while 
coding in QtC.

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nikita Krupenko]

2016-04-05 18:11 GMT+03:00 Curtis Mitch :
> The GIF seemed to demonstrate some kind of selective editing. I just tried 
> this with the block selection in Creator and it just overwrites the text. Can 
> you give an example of how you can achieve what's done in the GIF using block 
> selection in Creator?

Just select zero-width block with Alt and you'll get big cursor where
you can enter some text (i.e. insert without replacing).
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Reinhardt Behm]

On Tuesday 05 April 2016 18:44:17 Emre Besirik wrote:
> > On 05 Apr 2016, at 18:29, Reinhardt Behm  wrote:
> > 
> > On Tuesday 05 April 2016 16:03:35 NoMercy wrote:
> >> And people keep saying that it is open source, you do it, why don't you
> >> do
> >> it etc. well it maybe open source but I think Qt company is payed well
> >> considering the license costs, why dont Qt Company do something about it?
> >> isn't it Qt Company's official product after all?
> > 
> > First please reply to the list and not to individual users. If I answered
> > to the list means that I am reading it. No need for direct copies to me.
> > Second please don't top post even if you find this more "modern”.
> 
> I do not always use the same mail client and even though I try to clean up
> things, as I am a simply human, I may forget to do somethings occasionally.
> And about the top-posting; thats really an argument belong to entirely
> different thread on its own. don’t get me started on the anti-topposting
> obsession/top-post allergy of people here please… And even though its not
> only me doing these “mistakes” you only seem to attack me over these, I’m
> wondering why...

Maybe others don't.

> > On which real data are just "statistics" based? Seeing many discussions in
> > this list as well as privately I doubt the validity of your numbers.
> 
> No real data actually but mere observations, don’t need any real data. its
> just my personal opinion, I do not claim to now for sure.

That tells a big story.
We do not need facts, we have an opinion.

Please go trolling somewhere else.

-- 
Reinhardt


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 05 Apr 2016, at 18:29, Reinhardt Behm  wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 05 April 2016 16:03:35 NoMercy wrote:
>> 
>> And people keep saying that it is open source, you do it, why don't you do
>> it etc. well it maybe open source but I think Qt company is payed well
>> considering the license costs, why dont Qt Company do something about it?
>> isn't it Qt Company's official product after all?
> 
> First please reply to the list and not to individual users. If I answered to 
> the list means that I am reading it. No need for direct copies to me.
> Second please don't top post even if you find this more "modern”.

I do not always use the same mail client and even though I try to clean up 
things, as I am a simply human, I may forget to do somethings occasionally.
And about the top-posting; thats really an argument belong to entirely 
different thread on its own. don’t get me started on the anti-topposting 
obsession/top-post allergy of people here please… And even though its not only 
me doing these “mistakes” you only seem to attack me over these, I’m wondering 
why...

> 
> On which real data are just "statistics" based? Seeing many discussions in 
> this list as well as privately I doubt the validity of your numbers.


No real data actually but mere observations, don’t need any real data. its just 
my personal opinion, I do not claim to now for sure.

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On terça-feira, 5 de abril de 2016 16:23:01 PDT NoMercy wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sylvain Pointeau  > wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Why are you not able to use CLion? it is cmake based project, it should
> > work with Qt pretty well, shouldn't it?
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Sylvain
> 
> Yes I can but there are still a lot of missing things :(

In other words, CLion is eons behind Qt Creator in Qt support.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On terça-feira, 5 de abril de 2016 12:55:22 PDT Curtis Mitch wrote:
> 1. Have you even try to read people's comments on that link I've shared?
> (Yes they are practically begging JetBrains)
> 
> I did read the bug report, yep. So what if they’re begging JetBrains? Rather
> than try to shame developers into converting one product into another, why
> not contribute specific features that you think are missing? Tell your
> friends commenting on that bug report that they can write a plugin for Qt
> Creator, and that it’s all open source.

I just want to add that there's also nothing wrong in making JetBrains a more 
capable IDE for developing Qt-based projects. Yes, go beg them, go send 
patches to them too.

The more the merrier.

It's also a good way to get Qt Creator developers to pay attention to a given 
other IDE.

But you cannot tell people what *not* to work on.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On terça-feira, 5 de abril de 2016 16:03:35 PDT NoMercy wrote:
> And people keep saying that it is open source, you do it, why don't you do
> it etc. well it maybe open source but I think Qt company is payed well
> considering the license costs, why dont Qt Company do something about it?
> isn't it Qt Company's official product after all?

I don't work for the Qt Company and I don't know their financials well, but my 
guess is that they are not swimming in money and profits. It costs money to do 
what they're doing now and it costs money to do other things that they aren't 
doing yet. (obviously)

More specifically, I don't think there's a financial interest. Do you really 
think that the Qt Company is going to make a lot more money if this plugin 
existed? Who would buy a commercial licence just because the CLion plugin 
exists?

No, the way I guess it works, when companies choose a commercial Qt licence, 
they don't care which IDEs their developers use.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Reinhardt Behm]

On Tuesday 05 April 2016 16:03:35 NoMercy wrote:
> I think after countless agruments in this thread I will try to do that at
> best I can or find some interested people and help them maybe :(
> But the thing is that I'm sorry that after some point when 90% of Qt
> users/developers start to use/see/accept other IDEs as default for Qt
> development instead of QtCreator when there is a real good alternative,
> people will feel sorry coming this thread scratching their head and
> thinking what we have done wrong... after that point winning people back to
> QtCreator will be hard as hell and countless hours spent developing
> QtCreator will be in vein because there will be left around 15 people left
> happy around their closed environment.
> 
> And people keep saying that it is open source, you do it, why don't you do
> it etc. well it maybe open source but I think Qt company is payed well
> considering the license costs, why dont Qt Company do something about it?
> isn't it Qt Company's official product after all?

First please reply to the list and not to individual users. If I answered to 
the list means that I am reading it. No need for direct copies to me.
Second please don't top post even if you find this more "modern".

On which real data are just "statistics" based? Seeing many discussions in 
this list as well as privately I doubt the validity of your numbers.

-- 
Reinhardt



___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

> -Original Message-
> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany.com@qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Burak Arslan
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 4:24 PM
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?
> 
> 
> 
> On 04/05/16 13:25, Curtis Mitch wrote:
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Interest
> >> [mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany.com@qt-
> >> project.org] On Behalf Of Julius Bullinger
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 12:05 PM
> >> To: interest@qt-project.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?
> >>
> >> On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> >>>>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page -
> >>>> its
> >> epic,
> >>>>and Atom badly implements it),
> >>> Explain. Sounds intriguing.
> >> It's better shown than explained, see e.g.
> >> http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif and
> >> https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc
> >> 0f456
> >> 2034.gif for examples.
> >>
> >> This is the only feature I'm really missing in Qt Creator, and the
> >> reason I keep Sublime open besides Creator all the time.
> >> There's pretty basic multi-cursor functionality in Creator, but it's
> >> not quite as polished as Sublime's. Really, you need to try yourself
> >> to see how useful it is!
> > Looks interesting, but I find it odd that that is solely enough to
> warrant keeping another editor open, because you can easily do it in
> Creator. For renaming instances of a symbol: Ctrl + Shift + R. For stuff
> like keywords: good old find and replace! :p You can select a bunch of
> text first to limit it to a certain block.
> 
> 
> You know what I learnt from this thread so far? No one reads the QtCreator
> user manual :)
> 
> Or I could be using a QtCreator version from the future or something :)
> 
> So:
> 
> 1) [Ctrl+K] : some_function ([column][space]some_function)
> 
> searches all (imported) symbols.
> 
> 2) My QtCreator knows does the right thing when stumbling upon auto,
> std::unique_ptr etc and I don't even know which code model I'm using. It
> "just worked" for me til today.
> 
> 3) When you use Alt+Shift to block-select you can perform block edit like
> shown in the gifs above.
> 
> In Kate, KWrite and friends it's Ctrl+Shift+B to switch selection mode and
> same principles start to apply there as well.

The GIF seemed to demonstrate some kind of selective editing. I just tried this 
with the block selection in Creator and it just overwrites the text. Can you 
give an example of how you can achieve what's done in the GIF using block 
selection in Creator?

> 4) It's just brain-dead to suggest using a non-Qt ide for Qt. Qt is the
> perfect framework for writing an IDE, irrespective of the language you're
> aiming for :) JetBrains stuff is only performant in the expense of a huge
> memory footprint and relatively longer startup time. This is of course
> fine in the age of multi-gigabyte-memory SSD-backed developer
> workstations, but don't claim that using Java is NOT a trade-off. No
> JetBrains product will work as nicely (or at all) with given only the
> resources that Qt Creator is using.
> 
> 5) Saying "Hey I'm not trying to be hard on [some people] but they suck"
> is not less insulting than a straight-up "You suck". I wouldn't expect the
> community to fall for this. Come on guys, don't feed the troll :)
> 
> Dear Qt Tooling team,
> 
> Please ignore the trolls. You are doing a wonderful job. Enjoy the spring
> in Berlin :)
> 
> Best,
> Burak
> 
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> 4) It's just brain-dead to suggest using a non-Qt ide for Qt. Qt is the
> perfect framework for writing an IDE, irrespective of the language
> you're aiming for :) JetBrains stuff is only performant in the expense
> of a huge memory footprint and relatively longer startup time. This is
> of course fine in the age of multi-gigabyte-memory SSD-backed developer
> workstations, but don't claim that using Java is NOT a trade-off.

I agree here Java is not perfect, it has downsides but after initial startup it 
definetely pays of


> 5) Saying "Hey I'm not trying to be hard on [some people] but they suck"
> is not less insulting than a straight-up "You suck". I wouldn't expect
> the community to fall for this. Come on guys, don't feed the troll :)

No I really do NOT mean to insulting anyone, most likely the problem is that 
the team behind QtCreator is just no UI/UX expert, that doesn’t mean they are 
bad at their job! this is no trolling...
Keep encoureging previous generation stuff as good and denying improvements is 
no good to anyone.

Regards,
Emre Besirik___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 05 Apr 2016, at 17:08, Guenter Schwann  wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday, April 05, 2016 04:19:42 PM NoMercy wrote:
>> That QtCreator is eons behind current technology and trends, isn't it very
>> obvious?
> 
> No! Absolutely not.
> QtCreator is a really great IDE. Very lightweight, but still very powerful.
> Simply using the "Esc" button is a single fantastic feature that I haven't 
> seen elsewhere.
> 
> And for the technology: CLion as well as QtCreator are using clang for the 
> code model (which is the heart of an IDE).
> What other technology do you mean?
> 
> What trends do you see for IDEs?
> 
>> I would say just checkout features of ANY JetBrains product but
>> you don't even intend to so you are in therefor denial. (Not personally you
>> but many people who are objecting these)
> 
> I haven't used it yet - granted. But I have watched all the CLion releases so 
> far.
> They are looking promising. But I haven't seen any major feature that 
> QtCreator would lack (C++ only).

Some of the lacking features are smart autocomplete maybe, Ctrl+K like search 
but improved in a better UI, but most lacking part comes in UI/UX


Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Burak Arslan]

On 04/05/16 13:25, Curtis Mitch wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany.com@qt-
>> project.org] On Behalf Of Julius Bullinger
>> Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 12:05 PM
>> To: interest@qt-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?
>>
>> On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>>>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its
>> epic,
>>>>and Atom badly implements it),
>>> Explain. Sounds intriguing.
>> It's better shown than explained, see e.g.
>> http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif and
>> https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc0f456
>> 2034.gif for examples.
>>
>> This is the only feature I'm really missing in Qt Creator, and the reason
>> I keep Sublime open besides Creator all the time.
>> There's pretty basic multi-cursor functionality in Creator, but it's not
>> quite as polished as Sublime's. Really, you need to try yourself to see
>> how useful it is!
> Looks interesting, but I find it odd that that is solely enough to warrant 
> keeping another editor open, because you can easily do it in Creator. For 
> renaming instances of a symbol: Ctrl + Shift + R. For stuff like keywords: 
> good old find and replace! :p You can select a bunch of text first to limit 
> it to a certain block.


You know what I learnt from this thread so far? No one reads the
QtCreator user manual :)

Or I could be using a QtCreator version from the future or something :)

So:

1) [Ctrl+K] : some_function ([column][space]some_function)

searches all (imported) symbols.

2) My QtCreator knows does the right thing when stumbling upon auto,
std::unique_ptr etc and I don't even know which code model I'm using. It
"just worked" for me til today.

3) When you use Alt+Shift to block-select you can perform block edit
like shown in the gifs above.

In Kate, KWrite and friends it's Ctrl+Shift+B to switch selection mode
and same principles start to apply there as well.

4) It's just brain-dead to suggest using a non-Qt ide for Qt. Qt is the
perfect framework for writing an IDE, irrespective of the language
you're aiming for :) JetBrains stuff is only performant in the expense
of a huge memory footprint and relatively longer startup time. This is
of course fine in the age of multi-gigabyte-memory SSD-backed developer
workstations, but don't claim that using Java is NOT a trade-off. No
JetBrains product will work as nicely (or at all) with given only the
resources that Qt Creator is using.

5) Saying "Hey I'm not trying to be hard on [some people] but they suck"
is not less insulting than a straight-up "You suck". I wouldn't expect
the community to fall for this. Come on guys, don't feed the troll :)

Dear Qt Tooling team,

Please ignore the trolls. You are doing a wonderful job. Enjoy the
spring in Berlin :)

Best,
Burak

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

From: NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 3:20 PM
To: Curtis Mitch 
Cc: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?



On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Curtis Mitch 
mailto:mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com>> wrote:


From: NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com<mailto:nome...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 2:34 PM
To: Curtis Mitch 
mailto:mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com>>
Cc: interest@qt-project.org<mailto:interest@qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?


On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Curtis Mitch 
mailto:mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com>> wrote:
> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
> trends and technology :(

> people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator 
> (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)

> And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start 
> to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
> something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
> ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see any other way 
> :(

Hahaaa! I especially like the “I don’t see any other way” part. Fantastic. 
Also, very, very cringe-worthy. Telling a company it’s in denial because it 
doesn’t fork your favourite IDE is... ridiculous. It sounds like you haven’t 
actually attempted to properly use Qt Creator (e.g. by saying that Locator 
“only searches for filenames”), and don’t intend on putting in any work 
yourself, even though it’s an open source project.


Hey look I didn't start to offend anybody about their work, but just get some 
realistic here;

I’m not a Qt Creator developer, but if I were, it would be pretty funny to be 
told I was in denial. What are they in denial about, exactly?

That QtCreator is eons behind current technology and trends, isn't it very 
obvious? I would say just checkout features of ANY JetBrains product but you 
don't even intend to so you are in therefor denial. (Not personally you but 
many people who are objecting these)


No one from The Qt Company had even replied before you told them that they’re 
in denial. The others who have replied are not employees of The Qt Company. 
They were also suggesting ways to achieve the things that you said were 
missing, not saying that there isn’t room for improvement. So, to summarise, 
you’re telling random people on a mailing list that they’re in denial over 
something that they never denied.


1. Have you even try to read people's comments on that link I've shared? (Yes 
they are practically begging JetBrains)

I did read the bug report, yep. So what if they’re begging JetBrains? Rather 
than try to shame developers into converting one product into another, why not 
contribute specific features that you think are missing? Tell your friends 
commenting on that bug report that they can write a plugin for Qt Creator, and 
that it’s all open source.

I'm not trying to shame anyone, I'm simply trying to wake people up from their 
sleep, trying to convince to look around instead of just accept what you 
already have...

Then you need to reconsider the way you communicate, because the replies you’re 
getting are a direct result of talking like you’re owed the world, when, in 
reality, you’ve put in no effort (be it Jira suggestions or patches) nor paid a 
dollar towards what you’re asking. I would be hard pressed to think of a less 
constructive way of generating interest in the things that you want than 
wording an email in the manner you have.


2. Have you ever used ANY JetBrains product before? for how long? then you'll 
see there the huge difference between JOY of coding and JOB of coding.

No, and I have no plans to. I’m not arguing that JetBrains’ product doesn’t 
have good features.

If you accept that JetBrains products have some good features why not implement 
those SOME of good features to our QtCreator?

It seems you’re not getting the point.


3. And yes I don't see any other way IF you want to be part of the solution 
instead of being in denial!

Again, can you tell me what I’m in denial of? If I find something lacking with 
Qt Creator, I file a suggestion or fix it myself if it’s easy enough. That’s 
being part of the solution. Doing what you’re doing in the way you’re doing it 
is textbook “being part of the problem”.

The problem is the lacking things wont come without nothing short of a 
revolution. it would take eons just to write whats lacking in QtCreator (hence 
eons behind others) thats why I suggested a plugin or a fresh start with 
intellij platform. besides it is The Official Qt Company product we are talking 
about, while it is good to have the product as open source, relying solely to 
contributors for improvement aspecially a revolutionary and big o

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nye]

> I’m really thinking about it actually but I don’t want QtCreator
contributions to go in vein and I think it will come to a point where no
one will use it anymore in someday :(

Well, the thing is many people aren't so willing to switch IDEs they've
worked with for years, even if they admittedly have some small
bugs/deficiencies. You certainly haven't convinced me.

I don't care much for the C++11 and "everything is auto/lambda" development
technique, so I don't need the CLang code model and consequently my creator
is fast, stable and has no problem with completion. "Auto" confuses me as
much as any code model I suppose.

Refactoring is a fancy word for rewriting code, no? So basically you want
your IDE to write the methods' skeletons? I'm pretty sure that creator have
this although I don't use it. It seems quite faster for me to write it down
directly, utilizing hevaily(!) code completion; just works out of the box
for me and it's stable as hell.

So, finally why would I want to switch to a Java based IDE (I agree with
Nuno Santos on the point of Java)? It'd give me what exactly besides the
few months I have to invest in learning its tweaks, shortcuts (or remap
them) and behavior/UI? Sorry, man, your case is simply crumbling ...

Kind regards.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Emre Besirik  wrote:

>
> > On 05 Apr 2016, at 16:41, André Somers  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Op 05/04/2016 om 15:28 schreef NoMercy:
> >> Check out the bug report link in first mail.
> >>
> >>
> > So, start contributing to CLion... Why do you need Creator to be
> effectively dumped for that?
> >
> > André
>
>
> I’m really thinking about it actually but I don’t want QtCreator
> contributions to go in vein and I think it will come to a point where no
> one will use it anymore in someday :(
>
> Python has its own IDE right? who uses it actually?
>
> Regards,
> Emre Beşirik
> nome...@gmail.com
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Sylvain Pointeau]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:28 PM, NoMercy  wrote:

> Check out the bug report link in first mail.
>

I checked and the 2 items the most frequently asked are:

   1. open .pro files
   2. QML editor

for 1. I think you can use cmake, it is a little effort, but you will get
used to it
for 2. maybe jetbrains will implement it one day? you can open a feature
request on their side.

Best regards,
Sylvain
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 05 Apr 2016, at 16:41, André Somers  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Op 05/04/2016 om 15:28 schreef NoMercy:
>> Check out the bug report link in first mail.
>> 
>> 
> So, start contributing to CLion... Why do you need Creator to be effectively 
> dumped for that?
> 
> André


I’m really thinking about it actually but I don’t want QtCreator contributions 
to go in vein and I think it will come to a point where no one will use it 
anymore in someday :( 

Python has its own IDE right? who uses it actually?

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Somers]

Op 05/04/2016 om 15:28 schreef NoMercy:

Check out the bug report link in first mail.


So, start contributing to CLion... Why do you need Creator to be 
effectively dumped for that?


André

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Somers]

Op 05/04/2016 om 15:23 schreef NoMercy:


On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sylvain Pointeau 
mailto:sylvain.point...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Hello,

Why are you not able to use CLion? it is cmake based project, it
should work with Qt pretty well, shouldn't it?

Best regards,
Sylvain


Yes I can but there are still a lot of missing things :(

So, may I conclude it is not all that brilliant after all then? If you 
think CLion is better, use that. If you think Creator is suits your 
needs better, use that. I don't care either way. If you use either but 
see a feature in the other that you really like, contribute it or at 
least file a suggestion for it to be added. Bitching in mailing lists 
isn't going to have much effect.


General tip: most people won't take arguments such as "X is eons behind" 
or "you are in denial" or you should seriously try product Y and if you 
don't you don't know what you are talking about" (while they are pretty 
happy with what they have) seriously. There are, eh, more effictive ways 
to discuss and convince others.


André


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

I totally disagree with you here, JB products are way faster in code
completion for instance and WY smarter...

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Nuno Santos 
wrote:

> On 05 Apr 2016, at 14:19, NoMercy  wrote:
>
> people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator
> (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)
>
>
> Sorry to interfere here but I couldn’t read this without sharing my
> thoughts. Qt Creator is simply the most straightforward IDE around.
>
> All IDE based in Java simply suck because they are all slow like a turtle.
> I personally hate any kind of Java based software because of the
> performance impact.
>
> It is also a paradox a JET brain software using Java to support it. A JET
> brain cannot wait for Java to render. :)
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nuno Santos]

> On 05 Apr 2016, at 14:19, NoMercy  wrote:
> 
> people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator 
> (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)

Sorry to interfere here but I couldn’t read this without sharing my thoughts. 
Qt Creator is simply the most straightforward IDE around.

All IDE based in Java simply suck because they are all slow like a turtle. I 
personally hate any kind of Java based software because of the performance 
impact. 

It is also a paradox a JET brain software using Java to support it. A JET brain 
cannot wait for Java to render. :)


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

Check out the bug report link in first mail.

Regards,
Emre Besirik

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Sylvain Pointeau  wrote:

>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:23 PM, NoMercy  wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sylvain Pointeau <
>> sylvain.point...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why are you not able to use CLion? it is cmake based project, it should
>>> work with Qt pretty well, shouldn't it?
>>>
>>
>> Yes I can but there are still a lot of missing things :(
>>
>
> What is missing exactly?
>
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

The thing is stuff that needs to chage (i think) can't just be covered by
some feature requests, tons of things need to change. There should be a
team of UI/UX experts who should reshape the whole thing. :(

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Nikita Krupenko  wrote:

> 2016-04-05 16:03 GMT+03:00 NoMercy :
> > I think after countless agruments in this thread I will try to do that at
> > best I can or find some interested people and help them maybe :(
> > But the thing is that I'm sorry that after some point when 90% of Qt
> > users/developers start to use/see/accept other IDEs as default for Qt
> > development instead of QtCreator when there is a real good alternative,
> > people will feel sorry coming this thread scratching their head and
> thinking
> > what we have done wrong... after that point winning people back to
> QtCreator
> > will be hard as hell and countless hours spent developing QtCreator will
> be
> > in vein because there will be left around 15 people left happy around
> their
> > closed environment.
> >
> > And people keep saying that it is open source, you do it, why don't you
> do
> > it etc. well it maybe open source but I think Qt company is payed well
> > considering the license costs, why dont Qt Company do something about it?
> > isn't it Qt Company's official product after all?
>
> If you want to change something in QtCreator, you can use two
> different approaches:
>
> 1. "Hey, your IDE is wretched, I don't like it. Throw away all your
> code and create new IDE from scratch. Or even better, don't waste time
> and add Qt support to my favorite IDE. And I don't want to offend
> somebody, just saying that it's rubbish."
>
> 2. "Hey, there is a good IDE xxx. It has nice features, that are
> missing in QtCreator: feature1, feature2, etc. What do you think about
> adding this features? I can create tickets in JIRA if you are agree
> that it would be good to have this features in QtC (or even volunteer
> to implement some of them)."
>
> I think, the second approach more constructive.
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Sylvain Pointeau]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:23 PM, NoMercy  wrote:

>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sylvain Pointeau <
> sylvain.point...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why are you not able to use CLion? it is cmake based project, it should
>> work with Qt pretty well, shouldn't it?
>>
>
> Yes I can but there are still a lot of missing things :(
>

What is missing exactly?
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sylvain Pointeau  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Why are you not able to use CLion? it is cmake based project, it should
> work with Qt pretty well, shouldn't it?
>
> Best regards,
> Sylvain
>
>
Yes I can but there are still a lot of missing things :(
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Sylvain Pointeau]

Hello,

Why are you not able to use CLion? it is cmake based project, it should
work with Qt pretty well, shouldn't it?

Best regards,
Sylvain

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:03 PM, NoMercy  wrote:

> I see the answers usually offering some workarounds, yes you can do that
> BUT in a few more steps or in a less pleasent way. Thats where IU/UX design
> comes in. People don't want extra steps, people don't want to use mouse etc.
> I observe that most of you guys objecting are don't even see what others
> are doing or don't even care beyond whats good for your use cases and you
> get angry when I or other people say things like eons behind while you
> don't even look what others doing or what are current trends or dont care
> for UI/UX of your IDE, You don't even now other good IDEs.
>
>
>
>> Regards,
>> Emre Besirik
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

From: Interest 
[mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On 
Behalf Of NoMercy
Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 3:04 PM
To: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

I see the answers usually offering some workarounds, yes you can do that BUT in 
a few more steps or in a less pleasent way. Thats where IU/UX design comes in. 
People don't want extra steps, people don't want to use mouse etc.

So, file bug reports.

I observe that most of you guys objecting are don't even see what others are 
doing or don't even care beyond whats good for your use cases and you get angry 
when I or other people say things like eons behind while you don't even look 
what others doing or what are current trends or dont care for UI/UX of your 
IDE, You don't even now other good IDEs.

New features are constantly being added to Creator, and they’re often from 
suggestions from users who see something in another IDE that is missing in 
Creator. The way to get a feature in is to suggest it (formally, via Jira) or 
write it yourself. The way to not get a feature in is to propose that Creator 
be rewritten and “replaced by CLion”. For the record, I’m not angry, I just 
find the way you’ve approached the whole situation amusing.

So because I don’t know of JetBrains’ IDE, I don’t know of any other good IDEs? 
Ok, if you say so! :)


Regards,
Emre Besirik

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Curtis Mitch 
wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 5 April 2016 2:34 PM
> *To:* Curtis Mitch 
> *Cc:* interest@qt-project.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Curtis Mitch <
> mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com> wrote:
>
> > I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current
> IDE trends and technology :(
>
>
>
> > people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from
> QtCreator (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)
>
>
>
> > And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world
> start to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or
> just do something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with
> jetbrains ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see
> any other way :(
>
>
>
> Hahaaa! I especially like the “I don’t see any other way” part. Fantastic.
> Also, very, very cringe-worthy. Telling a company it’s in denial because it
> doesn’t fork your favourite IDE is... ridiculous. It sounds like you
> haven’t actually attempted to properly use Qt Creator (e.g. by saying that
> Locator “only searches for filenames”), and don’t intend on putting in any
> work yourself, even though it’s an open source project.
>
>
>
>
>
> Hey look I didn't start to offend anybody about their work, but just get
> some realistic here;
>
>
>
> I’m not a Qt Creator developer, but if I were, it would be pretty funny to
> be told I was in denial. What are they in denial about, exactly?
>

That QtCreator is eons behind current technology and trends, isn't it very
obvious? I would say just checkout features of ANY JetBrains product but
you don't even intend to so you are in therefor denial. (Not personally you
but many people who are objecting these)


>
>
> 1. Have you even try to read people's comments on that link I've shared?
> (Yes they are practically begging JetBrains)
>
>
>
> I did read the bug report, yep. So what if they’re begging JetBrains?
> Rather than try to shame developers into converting one product into
> another, why not contribute specific features that you think are missing?
> Tell your friends commenting on that bug report that they can write a
> plugin for Qt Creator, and that it’s all open source.
>

I'm not trying to shame anyone, I'm simply trying to wake people up from
their sleep, trying to convince to look around instead of just accept what
you already have...


>
>
> 2. Have you ever used ANY JetBrains product before? for how long? then
> you'll see there the huge difference between JOY of coding and JOB of
> coding.
>
>
>
> No, and I have no plans to. I’m not arguing that JetBrains’ product
> doesn’t have good features.
>

If you accept that JetBrains products have some good features why not
implement those SOME of good features to our QtCreator?


>
>
> 3. And yes I don't see any other way IF you want to be part of the
> solution instead of being in denial!
>
>
>
> Again, can you tell me what I’m in denial of? If I find something lacking
> with Qt Creator, I file a suggestion or fix it myself if it’s easy enough.
> That’s being part of the solution. Doing what you’re doing in the way
> you’re doing it is textbook “being part of the problem”.
>

The problem is the lacking things wont come without nothing short of a
revolution. it would take eons just to write whats lacking in QtCreator
(hence eons behind others) thats why I suggested a plugin or a fresh start
with intellij platform. besides it is The Official Qt Company product we
are talking about, while it is good to have the product as open source,
relying solely to contributors for improvement aspecially a revolutionary
and big ones as these is not right. Qt Company should step in, I believe
they are making enough money...


>
>
> "and don’t intend on putting in any work yourself, even though it’s an
> open source project."
>
> I would put my work if it would mean something; trying to make such
> revolutionarising move on the existing QtCreator would practically
> re-writing it all from scratch while there are more convinient ways such as
> moving to intellij platform or just simply wrting a plugin for CLion maybe?
>
>
>
> Why do you have to re-write Creator from scratch?
>

>
> If you have a problem with the auto completion in Creator (or any other
> specific problem), file a bug report.
>

see my previous comment

Regards,

Emre Besirik
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

I see the answers usually offering some workarounds, yes you can do that
BUT in a few more steps or in a less pleasent way. Thats where IU/UX design
comes in. People don't want extra steps, people don't want to use mouse etc.
I observe that most of you guys objecting are don't even see what others
are doing or don't even care beyond whats good for your use cases and you
get angry when I or other people say things like eons behind while you
don't even look what others doing or what are current trends or dont care
for UI/UX of your IDE, You don't even now other good IDEs.



> Regards,
> Emre Besirik
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

I think after countless agruments in this thread I will try to do that at
best I can or find some interested people and help them maybe :(
But the thing is that I'm sorry that after some point when 90% of Qt
users/developers start to use/see/accept other IDEs as default for Qt
development instead of QtCreator when there is a real good alternative,
people will feel sorry coming this thread scratching their head and
thinking what we have done wrong... after that point winning people back to
QtCreator will be hard as hell and countless hours spent developing
QtCreator will be in vein because there will be left around 15 people left
happy around their closed environment.

And people keep saying that it is open source, you do it, why don't you do
it etc. well it maybe open source but I think Qt company is payed well
considering the license costs, why dont Qt Company do something about it?
isn't it Qt Company's official product after all?


On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Reinhardt Behm  wrote:

> On Monday 04 April 2016 16:50:12 Emre Besirik wrote:
> > > On 04 Apr 2016, at 15:41, Konstantin Tokarev 
> wrote:
> > >> Well there must be something can be done, Qt Can use Intellij like
> google
> > >> did, I know its a little bit more work compared to CLion fork but it
> is
> > >> possible.>
> > > A liitle bit?
> > >
> > > That would mean porting of all clang code model code (and maybe other
> > > parts) into different IDE architecture and integrating all C++ code
> with
> > > Java. And it still would be the same clang code model that you don't
> > > like.
> > Ok but jetbrains did it, why cant we?
> >
> > >> Or at least a plugin for intellij platform maybe? I mean as long as
> you
> > >> want to be part of the solution...>
> > > Well, if CLion gets bigger market share than Visual Studio it might
> happen
> > > that VS plugin is dropped in favour of this IDE.
> > We all know thats not going to happen, why not to have plugins for 2
> > different IDEs?
>
> What is stops you from doing it?
> It is all open source and many people are quite happy with QtCreator. If
> you
> want it changed do it, or find somebody who will do it and finance it.
>
> --
> Reinhardt
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

From: NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 2:34 PM
To: Curtis Mitch 
Cc: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?


On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Curtis Mitch 
mailto:mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com>> wrote:
> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
> trends and technology :(

> people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator 
> (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)

> And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start 
> to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
> something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
> ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see any other way 
> :(

Hahaaa! I especially like the “I don’t see any other way” part. Fantastic. 
Also, very, very cringe-worthy. Telling a company it’s in denial because it 
doesn’t fork your favourite IDE is... ridiculous. It sounds like you haven’t 
actually attempted to properly use Qt Creator (e.g. by saying that Locator 
“only searches for filenames”), and don’t intend on putting in any work 
yourself, even though it’s an open source project.


Hey look I didn't start to offend anybody about their work, but just get some 
realistic here;

I’m not a Qt Creator developer, but if I were, it would be pretty funny to be 
told I was in denial. What are they in denial about, exactly?

1. Have you even try to read people's comments on that link I've shared? (Yes 
they are practically begging JetBrains)

I did read the bug report, yep. So what if they’re begging JetBrains? Rather 
than try to shame developers into converting one product into another, why not 
contribute specific features that you think are missing? Tell your friends 
commenting on that bug report that they can write a plugin for Qt Creator, and 
that it’s all open source.

2. Have you ever used ANY JetBrains product before? for how long? then you'll 
see there the huge difference between JOY of coding and JOB of coding.

No, and I have no plans to. I’m not arguing that JetBrains’ product doesn’t 
have good features.

3. And yes I don't see any other way IF you want to be part of the solution 
instead of being in denial!

Again, can you tell me what I’m in denial of? If I find something lacking with 
Qt Creator, I file a suggestion or fix it myself if it’s easy enough. That’s 
being part of the solution. Doing what you’re doing in the way you’re doing it 
is textbook “being part of the problem”.

"and don’t intend on putting in any work yourself, even though it’s an open 
source project."
I would put my work if it would mean something; trying to make such 
revolutionarising move on the existing QtCreator would practically re-writing 
it all from scratch while there are more convinient ways such as moving to 
intellij platform or just simply wrting a plugin for CLion maybe?

Why do you have to re-write Creator from scratch?

If you have a problem with the auto completion in Creator (or any other 
specific problem), file a bug report.

If you want there to be a plugin for CLion, write one. I’d bet a large sum of 
money that it’s not going to happen any other way. Plenty of external 
developers have contributed fixes and even entire plugins to Creator.

Regards,
Emre Besirik
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Reinhardt Behm]

On Monday 04 April 2016 16:50:12 Emre Besirik wrote:
> > On 04 Apr 2016, at 15:41, Konstantin Tokarev  wrote:
> >> Well there must be something can be done, Qt Can use Intellij like google
> >> did, I know its a little bit more work compared to CLion fork but it is
> >> possible.> 
> > A liitle bit?
> > 
> > That would mean porting of all clang code model code (and maybe other
> > parts) into different IDE architecture and integrating all C++ code with
> > Java. And it still would be the same clang code model that you don't
> > like.
> Ok but jetbrains did it, why cant we?
> 
> >> Or at least a plugin for intellij platform maybe? I mean as long as you
> >> want to be part of the solution...> 
> > Well, if CLion gets bigger market share than Visual Studio it might happen
> > that VS plugin is dropped in favour of this IDE.
> We all know thats not going to happen, why not to have plugins for 2
> different IDEs?

What is stops you from doing it? 
It is all open source and many people are quite happy with QtCreator. If you 
want it changed do it, or find somebody who will do it and finance it.

-- 
Reinhardt


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[NoMercy]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Curtis Mitch 
wrote:

> > I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current
> IDE trends and technology :(
>
>
>
> > people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from
> QtCreator (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)
>
>
>
> > And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world
> start to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or
> just do something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with
> jetbrains ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see
> any other way :(
>
>
>
> Hahaaa! I especially like the “I don’t see any other way” part. Fantastic.
> Also, very, very cringe-worthy. Telling a company it’s in denial because it
> doesn’t fork your favourite IDE is... ridiculous. It sounds like you
> haven’t actually attempted to properly use Qt Creator (e.g. by saying that
> Locator “only searches for filenames”), and don’t intend on putting in any
> work yourself, even though it’s an open source project.
>
>
>

Hey look I didn't start to offend anybody about their work, but just get
some realistic here;
1. Have you even try to read people's comments on that link I've shared?
(Yes they are practically begging JetBrains)
2. Have you ever used ANY JetBrains product before? for how long? then
you'll see there the huge difference between JOY of coding and JOB of
coding.
3. And yes I don't see any other way IF you want to be part of the solution
instead of being in denial!

"and don’t intend on putting in any work yourself, even though it’s an open
source project."
I would put my work if it would mean something; trying to make such
revolutionarising move on the existing QtCreator would practically
re-writing it all from scratch while there are more convinient ways such as
moving to intellij platform or just simply wrting a plugin for CLion maybe?

Regards,
Emre Besirik
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 04 Apr 2016, at 15:39, Sean Harmer  wrote:
> 
> ps No need to forward everybody's replies to the list. They are cc'd to you 
> as 
> well as to the list.

I didn’t forward anythink? I know how mailing lists work ;) I just accidentally 
double posted one of mail own mails and told someone to also post to list 
instead of just replying to the person.

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 04 Apr 2016, at 15:41, Konstantin Tokarev  wrote:
>> 
>> Well there must be something can be done, Qt Can use Intellij like google 
>> did, I know its a little bit more work compared to CLion fork but it is 
>> possible. 
> 
> A liitle bit?
> 
> That would mean porting of all clang code model code (and maybe other parts) 
> into different IDE architecture and integrating all C++ code with Java. And 
> it still would be the same clang code model that you don't like.

Ok but jetbrains did it, why cant we?

> 
>> Or at least a plugin for intellij platform maybe? I mean as long as you want 
>> to be part of the solution...
> 
> Well, if CLion gets bigger market share than Visual Studio it might happen 
> that VS plugin is dropped in favour of this IDE.
> 

We all know thats not going to happen, why not to have plugins for 2 different 
IDEs?

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Jean-Michaël Celerier]

Class implementations

As somebody wrote already, this refactoring already exists.

While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text
editor, in light gray

You can hover the variables and see the current value.

Some signals are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from
QButton comes from QAbstractButton.

See http://s1.webmshare.com/JrdbJ.webm

Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or
go to a particular location in your code):

You mean like when you press ctrl-k in QtCreator which allows you to go to
any class, file, method, or such just by typing its first few letters ?

Others points are valid concerns, but I think that you should read the
QtCreator manual a bit :

http://doc.qt.io/qtcreator/creator-editor-refactoring.html

http://doc.qt.io/qtcreator/creator-editor-locator.html
Best,
Jean-Michaël Celerier

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Emre Besirik  wrote:

>
>1. XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI
>files, and maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know -
>so even for unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
>2. Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and
>pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
>3. When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda
>expressions in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for
>me. For example:
>
>AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
>builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___
>
>Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which derives 
> new DialogInterface.OnClickListener()
>
>4. When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the
>corresponding enum, and adds the needed type.
>5. Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
>ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
>it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again,
>control+enter).
>6. While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the
>text editor, in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
>7. When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
>connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
>and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the
>corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals,
>but with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals
>are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from
>QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I
>need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it
>(I did not have to know this in Qt4).
>8. When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me.
>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its
>epic, and Atom badly implements it),
>
>
>- Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open
>file or go to a particular location in your code):
>   - search symbols
>   - files in your project
>   - search everywhere
>   - you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples
>- *Smart* code completion. and by smart I mean for instance; if I’m
>going to assign something to an int type do not suggest me different return
>types of functions or variables. do smart things like; if I’m
>creating/assigning a variable something for first time suggest me things
>like object initializations first depending on the object type. And try to
>do these without delays as much as possible. cache, index, think beyond the
>box.
>- Do things so obvious your self, do not wait for me to do.
>- tabs — the current working type of open documents are really
>annoying. if you have split view open, first you need to select the view
>you intend to change open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed
>the non-intended document in workspace
>- ONE key to kill all other views and leave code windows open only
>(like distraction free mode of intellij)
>- go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
>- have a dark UI mode :)
>- have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
>- have a better user friendly UI
>
>
> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current
> IDE trends and technology :(
> Just checkout the comments at the link I shared in my first post, people
> are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator (no
> offense intended but this is the case for many people)
> And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world
> start to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or
> just do something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with
> jetbrains ide 

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

From: Interest 
[mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On 
Behalf Of Preet
Sent: Monday, 4 April 2016 11:30 PM
Cc: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

Hey I want to chime in for the Creator devs that might be reading this: please 
keep doing what you do, QtCreator is *awesome*. It always seems like once 
people start liking and using certain IDEs and editors it becomes like a 
religion and people love talking down everything else. So much of 'tabs vs 
menu', 'color themes', 'UI-friendliness', etc can be subjective. Saying 
QtCreator "is actually eons behind the current IDE trends and technology" is 
just insulting. There are plenty of things in QtCreator that could use 
improvement, but thats true of most software. In general its a polished IDE 
that makes working with C++ way nicer and I can't wait to see how QtCreator 
gets even better in the future.


This. I think the Creator devs must have built up a nice level of restraint 
after dealing with these kinds of “users” (has this person actually used 
Creator properly?).
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
> trends and technology :(

> people are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator 
> (no offense intended but this is the case for many people)

> And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start 
> to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
> something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
> ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see any other way 
> :(

Hahaaa! I especially like the “I don’t see any other way” part. Fantastic. 
Also, very, very cringe-worthy. Telling a company it’s in denial because it 
doesn’t fork your favourite IDE is... ridiculous. It sounds like you haven’t 
actually attempted to properly use Qt Creator (e.g. by saying that Locator 
“only searches for filenames”), and don’t intend on putting in any work 
yourself, even though it’s an open source project.

From: Interest 
[mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On 
Behalf Of Emre Besirik
Sent: Monday, 4 April 2016 4:22 PM
To: Jean-Michaël Celerier 
Cc: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?


On 04 Apr 2016, at 16:55, Jean-Michaël Celerier 
mailto:jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Class implementations

As somebody wrote already, this refactoring already exists.
While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text editor, 
in light gray

You can hover the variables and see the current value.
Some signals are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton 
comes from QAbstractButton.

See http://s1.webmshare.com/JrdbJ.webm
Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or go to 
a particular location in your code):

You mean like when you press ctrl-k in QtCreator which allows you to go to any 
class, file, method, or such just by typing its first few letters ?

it only searches for filenames, thats not what I meant only, if you could 
checkout any jetbrains product, you’ll see the huge difference.

You only offer mostly workarounds which are not the same. debugging values for 
instance; yes we can also see the values in the debug windows if we’d like to 
but its not the same, when it is shown inline you just need to look no other 
action required. QtCreator is not user friendly, its not designed in a user 
centric way. you always have to do ~3x more action to do the same things in 
QtCreator compared to modern IDEs.
A good IDE (I think) should avoid to make its users have to take their hand off 
the keyboard to reach the mouse or touchpad as much as possible, to do this you 
should have a perfect keybord shortcut system, which also should avoid to make 
its users to have multiple keystrokes (double esc and then something more etc.)
Jetbrains products are really engineered very well on their UI/UX part, if we 
can not have/afford an experienced UI/UX team of professionals then at least we 
should inspect what they (jetbrains and/or others) have done and learn from 
them then apply to QtCreator maybe?

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com<mailto:nome...@gmail.com>

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nikita Krupenko]

2016-04-04 15:13 GMT+03:00 Emre Besirik :
> Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or go
> to a particular location in your code):
>
> search symbols
> files in your project
> search everywhere
> you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples

There is a search box and you can use Ctrl+k shortcut for it.

Though CLion may be good at C++, I have doubts, that it can provide
good QML support, especially between QML and C++. QtCreator can also
create and deploy Qt projects to mobile devices out of the box, can
CLion do this?
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Jean-Michaël Celerier]

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Emre Besirik  wrote:

>
> it only searches for filenames, thats not what I meant only, if you could
> checkout any jetbrains product, you’ll see the huge difference.
>

No it does not.
If you type :
"c NameOfMyClass"
it will look for a class.

If you type :
"m aMethodName"
it will look for a method.

If you type:
"git commit"
 it will open the graphical commit window.

If you type :
"? QPushButton"
it will open the help for QPushButton

etc...

> Jetbrains products are really engineered very well on their UI/UX part,
if we can not have/afford an experienced UI/UX team of professionals then
at least we should inspect what they (jetbrains and/or others) have done
and learn from them then apply to QtCreator maybe?

This I agree with.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Preet]

Hey I want to chime in for the Creator devs that might be reading this:
please keep doing what you do, QtCreator is *awesome*. It always seems like
once people start liking and using certain IDEs and editors it becomes like
a religion and people love talking down everything else. So much of 'tabs
vs menu', 'color themes', 'UI-friendliness', etc can be subjective. Saying
QtCreator "is actually eons behind the current IDE trends and technology"
is just insulting. There are plenty of things in QtCreator that could use
improvement, but thats true of most software. In general its a polished IDE
that makes working with C++ way nicer and I can't wait to see how QtCreator
gets even better in the future.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Curtis Mitch]

> -Original Message-
> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+mitch.curtis=theqtcompany.com@qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Julius Bullinger
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 12:05 PM
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?
> 
> On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> >>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its
> epic,
> >>and Atom badly implements it),
> >
> > Explain. Sounds intriguing.
> 
> It's better shown than explained, see e.g.
> http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif and
> https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc0f456
> 2034.gif for examples.
> 
> This is the only feature I'm really missing in Qt Creator, and the reason
> I keep Sublime open besides Creator all the time.
> There's pretty basic multi-cursor functionality in Creator, but it's not
> quite as polished as Sublime's. Really, you need to try yourself to see
> how useful it is!

Looks interesting, but I find it odd that that is solely enough to warrant 
keeping another editor open, because you can easily do it in Creator. For 
renaming instances of a symbol: Ctrl + Shift + R. For stuff like keywords: good 
old find and replace! :p You can select a bunch of text first to limit it to a 
certain block.

> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Julius Bullinger]

On Monday, 4. April 2016 18:23, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic,
>>and Atom badly implements it),
>
> Explain. Sounds intriguing.

It's better shown than explained, see e.g. http://i.stack.imgur.com/TMRK3.gif 
and 
https://packagecontrol.io/readmes/img/d346da37ce3d306f23f960f2a103fbc0f4562034.gif
 for examples.

This is the only feature I'm really missing in Qt Creator, and the reason I 
keep Sublime open besides Creator all the time.
There's pretty basic multi-cursor functionality in Creator, but it's not quite 
as polished as Sublime's. Really, you need to try yourself to see how useful it 
is!
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Guenter Schwann]

On Monday, April 04, 2016 03:28:03 PM Emre Besirik wrote:
> * Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file
> or go to a particular location in your code):
> * search symbols
> * files in your project
> * search everywhere
> * you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples

You mean Locator?
http://doc.qt.io/qtcreator/creator-editor-locator.html

> * ONE key to kill all other views
> and leave code windows open only (like distraction free mode of
> intellij)

Set a shortcut for "CloseAllExceptVisible"?

> * go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.

Move the cursor to the member variable in the class and press Alt-Enter ...

> >> * have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)

There are a tons of shortcuts, and you can fully customize them.
http://doc.qt.io/qtcreator/creator-keyboard-shortcuts.html

> * have a better user friendly UI

I like the UI a lot.

> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current
> IDE trends and technology :( 

QtCreator works really well for me. I prefer it over VisualStudio. CLion looks 
nice. But I haven't seen a lot 
of features not available in QtCreator.

By the way it seems you missed quite some refactoring:
http://doc.qt.io/qtcreator/creator-editor-refactoring.html

Regards
Günter

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On segunda-feira, 4 de abril de 2016 14:47:35 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:
> Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or go
> to a particular location in your code): search symbols
> files in your project
> search everywhere

Ctrl+K in Creator.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On segunda-feira, 4 de abril de 2016 14:06:00 PDT Diego Iastrubni wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Thiago Macieira 
> wrote:
> > But I have to say I don't feel any unpleasantness. Qt Creator is the best
> > IDE
> > I've ever used. There are some things I'd do differently, but that's all.
> > I
> > also expect that's how most Qt developers and especially the Qt Creator
> > developers feel, so it's highly unlikely we'll do a complete change of
> > direction.
> 
> Without trying to offence, "you need to walk around the neighborhoods" a
> little. 

Why? It solves the problem for me for developing Qt, why should I spend time 
with other tools? Is there any other tool better for developing Qt? Note I 
don't care about developing anything else.

>1. XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files,
>and maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know - so
> even for unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.

Don't care, I don't edit XML files.

>2. Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and
>pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.

Isn't this there?

>3. When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda
>expressions in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for
>me. For example:
> 
>AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
>builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___
> 
>Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which
> derives new DialogInterface.OnClickListener()

I have no idea what this is for.

>4. When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the
>corresponding enum, and adds the needed type.

Sounds like a very useful feature.

>5. Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
>ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
>it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).

Sounds like a poor API in the first place.

>6. While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text
>editor, in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).

You can do that by holding the Alt key and hovering over the variable, in 
Creator. But it sounds like a useful feature too.

>7. When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
>connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
>and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the
>corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals,
>but with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals
>are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes
> from QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a
> signal, I need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order
> connect it (I did not have to know this in Qt4).

Good idea too.

>8. When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me.

That is very vague.

>9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic,
>and Atom badly implements it),

Explain. Sounds intriguing.

> Not saying that QtCreator is not good, but blindly claiming it's the best
> is not always true. Its even possible that some things are working in
> QtC4... I need to re-check at home. I should also open official feature
> requests and not complaining on a ML. I agree.

I never claimed it was the best IDE. I claimed it was the best IDE I had ever 
used.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Christian Quast]

On Sunday 03 April 2016 14:41:51 Bob Hood wrote:
> But be aware that you're talking to somebody who has written whole 
> applications using nothing but vi and a command prompt.  I'm certainly
> not a  /connoisseur/of IDEs.  ;)

and I think this is the most important difference in ones opinion about 
QtCreator. If I remember correctly, its developers, at the very 
beginning, stated that they wanted to develop a lightweight IDE that is 
more a fancy text editor and, therefore, keeps out of your way.

I personally find it much more convenient to use than lets say 
VisualStudio or Eclipse (for me personally a totally overloaded IDE, 
just look at the right click menu). Than again, I currently develop 
using Kate (a 'simple' text editor) so my opinion is biased.

However, there, are some annoyances: for me the biggest is refactoring 
in VI mode (the most important feature of an editor ever! :) ), which 
got a lot better but its still not as good as without VI mode enabled. 

Also c++11 'auto' is confusing the IDE, but that might have changed 
recently.


best
  Christian


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 04 Apr 2016, at 16:55, Jean-Michaël Celerier 
>  wrote:
> 
> Class implementations
> 
> As somebody wrote already, this refactoring already exists.
> 
> While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text editor, 
> in light gray
> 
> You can hover the variables and see the current value.
> 
> Some signals are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton 
> comes from QAbstractButton.
> 
> See http://s1.webmshare.com/JrdbJ.webm 
> 
> Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or go 
> to a particular location in your code):
> 
> You mean like when you press ctrl-k in QtCreator which allows you to go to 
> any class, file, method, or such just by typing its first few letters ? 

it only searches for filenames, thats not what I meant only, if you could 
checkout any jetbrains product, you’ll see the huge difference.

You only offer mostly workarounds which are not the same. debugging values for 
instance; yes we can also see the values in the debug windows if we’d like to 
but its not the same, when it is shown inline you just need to look no other 
action required. QtCreator is not user friendly, its not designed in a user 
centric way. you always have to do ~3x more action to do the same things in 
QtCreator compared to modern IDEs.
A good IDE (I think) should avoid to make its users have to take their hand off 
the keyboard to reach the mouse or touchpad as much as possible, to do this you 
should have a perfect keybord shortcut system, which also should avoid to make 
its users to have multiple keystrokes (double esc and then something more etc.)
Jetbrains products are really engineered very well on their UI/UX part, if we 
can not have/afford an experienced UI/UX team of professionals then at least we 
should inspect what they (jetbrains and/or others) have done and learn from 
them then apply to QtCreator maybe?

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Konstantin Tokarev]

04.04.2016, 15:40, "Sean Harmer" :
> On Monday 04 April 2016 15:13:01 Emre Besirik wrote:
> 
>>  tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. if
>>  you have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend to
>>  change open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the
>>  non-intended document in workspace
>
> Some people like tabs, some don't. Tabs do not scale well beyond a handful of
> files though. I'd rather search through an alphabetical list (in the left 
> pane)
> or an ordered list (ctrl+tab popup menu) than hunting through 4 rows of
> arbitrarily ordered tab headers.

I guess he meant tabs as an alternative visual representation of screen split.

>
>>  ONE key to kill all other views and
>>  leave code windows open only (like distraction free mode of intellij)
>
> Shouldn't be that hard to add in. File a feature request in JIRA. For now,
> escape x 2, Ctrl+0 does a 1st order approximation.
>
>>  go
>>  proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
>>  have a dark UI mode :)
>
> Tools->Options->Environment->Theme->Dark.
>
>>  have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
>>  have a better user friendly UI
>
> Qt Creator is an open source project. Contribute if something is bugging you.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sean
>
> ps No need to forward everybody's replies to the list. They are cc'd to you as
> well as to the list.
> --
> Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK
> KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company
> Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
> Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604
> KDAB - Qt Experts
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Konstantin Tokarev]

04.04.2016, 15:28, "Emre Besirik" :
>>  On 04 Apr 2016, at 15:18, Konstantin Tokarev  wrote:
>>
>>  04.04.2016, 15:13, "Emre Besirik" :
  * XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files, 
 and maybe some part of *.QS. Basic XML structure is already know - so even 
 for unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
  * Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and 
 pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
  * When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda 
 expressions in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for 
 me. For example:

  AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
  builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___

  Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which derives 
 new DialogInterface.OnClickListener()
  *
  When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the 
 corresponding enum, and adds the needed type.
  *
  Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
  ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
  it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).
  *
  While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text 
 editor, in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
  *
  When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
  connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
  and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the 
 corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals, 
 but with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals 
 are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from 
 QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I 
 need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it 
 (I did not have to know this in Qt4).
  *
  When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me.
  *
  Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic, and 
 Atom badly implements it),
>>>
>>>  * Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file 
>>> or go to a particular location in your code):
>>>
>>>  * search symbols
>>>  * files in your project
>>>  * search everywhere
>>>  * you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples
>>>  * Smart code completion. and by smart I mean for instance; if I’m going to 
>>> assign something to an int type do not suggest me different return types of 
>>> functions or variables. do smart things like; if I’m creating/assigning a 
>>> variable something for first time suggest me things like object 
>>> initializations first depending on the object type. And try to do these 
>>> without delays as much as possible. cache, index, think beyond the box.
>>>  * Do things so obvious your self, do not wait for me to do.
>>>  * tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. 
>>> if you have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend 
>>> to change open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the 
>>> non-intended document in workspace
>>>  * ONE key to kill all other views and leave code windows open only (like 
>>> distraction free mode of intellij)
>>>  * go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
>>>  * have a dark UI mode :)
>>>  * have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
>>>  * have a better user friendly UI
>>>
>>>  I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current 
>>> IDE trends and technology :(
>>>  Just checkout the comments at the link I shared in my first post, people 
>>> are practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator (no 
>>> offense intended but this is the case for many people)
>>>  And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world 
>>> start to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or 
>>> just do something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with 
>>> jetbrains ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see 
>>> anyother way :(
>>
>>  There is a fundamental difference here with Android Studio case: IntelliJ 
>> Idea is an open-source product, while CLion isn't (and is not even 
>> free-as-in-beer, which is a dealbreaker for many people).
>>
>>  --
>>  Regards,
>>  Konstantin
>
> Well there must be something can be done, Qt Can use Intellij like google 
> did, I know its a little bit more work compared to CLion fork but it is 
> possible. 

A liitle bit?

That would mean porting of all clang code model code (and maybe other parts) 
into different IDE architecture and integrating all C++ code with Java. And it 
still would be the same clang code model that you don't like.

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Sean Harmer]

On Monday 04 April 2016 15:13:01 Emre Besirik wrote:

> tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. if
> you have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend to
> change open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the
> non-intended document in workspace

Some people like tabs, some don't. Tabs do not scale well beyond a handful of 
files though. I'd rather search through an alphabetical list (in the left pane) 
or an ordered list (ctrl+tab popup menu) than hunting through 4 rows of 
arbitrarily ordered tab headers.

> ONE key to kill all other views and
> leave code windows open only (like distraction free mode of intellij)

Shouldn't be that hard to add in. File a feature request in JIRA. For now, 
escape x 2, Ctrl+0 does a 1st order approximation.

> go
> proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
> have a dark UI mode :)

Tools->Options->Environment->Theme->Dark.

> have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
> have a better user friendly UI

Qt Creator is an open source project. Contribute if something is bugging you.

Cheers,

Sean

ps No need to forward everybody's replies to the list. They are cc'd to you as 
well as to the list.
-- 
Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK
KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company
Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604
KDAB - Qt Experts
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> On 04 Apr 2016, at 15:18, Konstantin Tokarev  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 04.04.2016, 15:13, "Emre Besirik" :
>>> * XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files, and 
>>> maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know - so even for 
>>> unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
>>> * Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and 
>>> pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
>>> * When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda 
>>> expressions in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for 
>>> me. For example:
>>> 
>>> AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
>>> builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___
>>> 
>>> Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which derives 
>>> new DialogInterface.OnClickListener()
>>> *
>>> When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the 
>>> corresponding enum, and adds the needed type.
>>> *
>>> Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
>>> ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
>>> it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).
>>> *
>>> While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text 
>>> editor, in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
>>> *
>>> When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
>>> connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
>>> and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the 
>>> corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals, 
>>> but with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals 
>>> are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from 
>>> QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I 
>>> need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it 
>>> (I did not have to know this in Qt4).
>>> *
>>> When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me.
>>> *
>>> Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic, and 
>>> Atom badly implements it),
>> 
>> * Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or 
>> go to a particular location in your code):
>> 
>> * search symbols
>> * files in your project
>> * search everywhere
>> * you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples
>> * Smart code completion. and by smart I mean for instance; if I’m going to 
>> assign something to an int type do not suggest me different return types of 
>> functions or variables. do smart things like; if I’m creating/assigning a 
>> variable something for first time suggest me things like object 
>> initializations first depending on the object type. And try to do these 
>> without delays as much as possible. cache, index, think beyond the box.
>> * Do things so obvious your self, do not wait for me to do.
>> * tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. if 
>> you have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend to 
>> change open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the 
>> non-intended document in workspace
>> * ONE key to kill all other views and leave code windows open only (like 
>> distraction free mode of intellij)
>> * go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
>> * have a dark UI mode :)
>> * have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
>> * have a better user friendly UI
>> 
>> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
>> trends and technology :(
>> Just checkout the comments at the link I shared in my first post, people are 
>> practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator (no offense 
>> intended but this is the case for many people)
>> And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start 
>> to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
>> something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
>> ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see anyother way 
>> :(
> 
> There is a fundamental difference here with Android Studio case: IntelliJ 
> Idea is an open-source product, while CLion isn't (and is not even 
> free-as-in-beer, which is a dealbreaker for many people).
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Konstantin

Well there must be something can be done, Qt Can use Intellij like google did, 
I know its a little bit more work compared to CLion fork but it is possible. Or 
at least a plugin for intellij platform maybe? I mean as long as you want to be 
part of the solution...


Regards/Saygilar,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Konstantin Tokarev]

04.04.2016, 15:13, "Emre Besirik" :
>> * XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files, and 
>> maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know - so even for 
>> unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
>> * Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and 
>> pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
>> * When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda 
>> expressions in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for me. 
>> For example:
>>
>> AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
>> builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___
>>
>> Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which derives new 
>> DialogInterface.OnClickListener()
>> *
>> When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the 
>> corresponding enum, and adds the needed type.
>> *
>> Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
>> ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
>> it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).
>> *
>> While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text 
>> editor, in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
>> *
>> When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
>> connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
>> and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the 
>> corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals, but 
>> with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals are 
>> hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from 
>> QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I 
>> need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it 
>> (I did not have to know this in Qt4).
>> *
>> When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me.
>> *
>> Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic, and 
>> Atom badly implements it),
>
> * Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or 
> go to a particular location in your code):
>
> * search symbols
> * files in your project
> * search everywhere
> * you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples
> * Smart code completion. and by smart I mean for instance; if I’m going to 
> assign something to an int type do not suggest me different return types of 
> functions or variables. do smart things like; if I’m creating/assigning a 
> variable something for first time suggest me things like object 
> initializations first depending on the object type. And try to do these 
> without delays as much as possible. cache, index, think beyond the box.
> * Do things so obvious your self, do not wait for me to do.
> * tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. if 
> you have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend to 
> change open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the 
> non-intended document in workspace
> * ONE key to kill all other views and leave code windows open only (like 
> distraction free mode of intellij)
> * go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
> * have a dark UI mode :)
> * have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
> * have a better user friendly UI
>
> I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
> trends and technology :(
> Just checkout the comments at the link I shared in my first post, people are 
> practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator (no offense 
> intended but this is the case for many people)
> And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start 
> to see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
> something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
> ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see anyother way :(

There is a fundamental difference here with Android Studio case: IntelliJ Idea 
is an open-source product, while CLion isn't (and is not even free-as-in-beer, 
which is a dealbreaker for many people).

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

Sorry forgot to mention this was meant for Alexey Rusakov :)


Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com



> On 04 Apr 2016, at 13:59, Emre Besirik  wrote:
> 
> BTW I think you are replying to the person instead of list address.
> list can not see your replies if you dont send it to the list.
> 
> Regards,
> Emre Beşirik
> nome...@gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
>> On 04 Apr 2016, at 13:47, Nikos Chantziaras  wrote:
>> 
>> On 04/04/16 13:29, Alexey Rusakov wrote:
>>> I don't know what I'm doing wrong but the new compile-time-checked
>>> syntax is auto-completed by my Qt Creator (that came with Qt 5.5.1) as
>>> well :)
>> 
>> With the clang code model? (Which is the only even remotely useful choice 
>> for modern C++.)
>> 
>> 
>>> and you're a bit blunt on not recommending the older syntax.
>>> Apparently you haven't spent enough time with QML.
>> 
>> QML is a run-time thing, so the new syntax doesn't apply. For C++ code, the 
>> new syntax is better, and also mandatory for lambdas. You cannot use the old 
>> syntax even if you wanted to.
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files, and 
> maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know - so even for 
> unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
> Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and pressing 
> control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
> When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda expressions 
> in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for me. For example:
> AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
> builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___
> Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which derives new 
> DialogInterface.OnClickListener()
> When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the corresponding 
> enum, and adds the needed type.
> Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
> ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
> it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).
> While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text editor, 
> in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
> When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
> connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
> and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the 
> corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals, but 
> with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals are hard 
> to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from 
> QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I 
> need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it (I 
> did not have to know this in Qt4).
> When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me. 
> Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic, and 
> Atom badly implements it),
Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or go to 
a particular location in your code):
search symbols
files in your project
search everywhere
you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples
Smart code completion. and by smart I mean for instance; if I’m going to assign 
something to an int type do not suggest me different return types of functions 
or variables. do smart things like; if I’m creating/assigning a variable 
something for first time suggest me things like object initializations first 
depending on the object type. And try to do these without delays as much as 
possible. cache, index, think beyond the box.
Do things so obvious your self, do not wait for me to do.
tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. if you 
have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend to change 
open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the non-intended 
document in workspace
ONE key to kill all other views and leave code windows open only (like 
distraction free mode of intellij)
go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
have a dark UI mode :)
have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
have a better user friendly UI

I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
trends and technology :(
Just checkout the comments at the link I shared in my first post, people are 
practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator (no offense 
intended but this is the case for many people)
And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start to 
see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see anyother way :(

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

> XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files, and 
> maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know - so even for 
> unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
> Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and pressing 
> control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
> When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda expressions 
> in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for me. For example:
> AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
> builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___
> Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which derives new 
> DialogInterface.OnClickListener()
> When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the corresponding 
> enum, and adds the needed type.
> Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
> ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
> it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).
> While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text editor, 
> in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
> When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
> connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
> and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the 
> corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals, but 
> with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals are hard 
> to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from 
> QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I 
> need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it (I 
> did not have to know this in Qt4).
> When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me. 
> Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic, and 
> Atom badly implements it),
Search! (like spotlight search with just one shortcut key to open file or go to 
a particular location in your code):
search symbols
files in your project
search everywhere
you can lookout jetbrains IDEs for more examples
Smart code completion. and by smart I mean for instance; if I’m going to assign 
something to an int type do not suggest me different return types of functions 
or variables. do smart things like; if I’m creating/assigning a variable 
something for first time suggest me things like object initializations first 
depending on the object type. And try to do these without delays as much as 
possible. cache, index, think beyond the box.
Do things so obvious your self, do not wait for me to do.
tabs — the current working type of open documents are really annoying. if you 
have split view open, first you need to select the view you intend to change 
open document. I dont know how many times I’ve changed the non-intended 
document in workspace
ONE key to kill all other views and leave code windows open only (like 
distraction free mode of intellij)
go proactive, generate getters/setter and stuff like that.
have a dark UI mode :)
have tons of more keyboard shortcuts (check out intellij)
have a better user friendly UI

I’m sorry to say this but QtCreator is actually eons behind the current IDE 
trends and technology :(
Just checkout the comments at the link I shared in my first post, people are 
practically begging jetbrains to save themselves from QtCreator (no offense 
intended but this is the case for many people)
And I think Qt Company should just get rid of the denial of the world start to 
see beyond horizon and do something, revolutionize QtCreator or just do 
something like Google did for android studio and embrace/deal with jetbrains 
ide and fork a CLion custimized for Qt development. I dont see any other way :(

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[André Hartmann]

Hi all,


 1. XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files,
and maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know -
so even for unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.


That would indeed be very cool.


 2. Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and
pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.


That already works if you right-click on the implementation class' name 
and choose Refactor -> Insert Virtual Function of Base Classes.


You get same menu with Alt+Enter on the class name.

There are a lot more refactoring actions available, all context aware. 
Maybe you need some time to explore them all.


Best regards,
Andre
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Diego Iastrubni]

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Thiago Macieira 
wrote:

>
> But I have to say I don't feel any unpleasantness. Qt Creator is the best
> IDE
> I've ever used. There are some things I'd do differently, but that's all. I
> also expect that's how most Qt developers and especially the Qt Creator
> developers feel, so it's highly unlikely we'll do a complete change of
> direction.
>
>
Without trying to offence, "you need to walk around the neighborhoods" a
little. While QtCreator is definitely "cool" and very speedy, there are
some things I see in IntelliJ/AndroidStudio which I definitely miss in
QtCreator:

   1. XML tags completion for known tags. This can be done for *.UI files,
   and maybe some part of *.QS.  Basic XML structure is already know - so even
   for unknown XML variants - the IDE knows what tag to close.
   2. Class implementations - for example, I derive from an interface and
   pressing control+enter on the type will add missing methods.
   3. When I define an inline class (Java, but can be done using lambda
   expressions in C++), just pressing control+enter will write the code for
   me. For example:

   AlertDialog.Builder builder = new AlertDialog.Builder(this);
   builder.setPositiveButton(android.R.string.ok, new ___

   Pressing "control+enter" will create a new anonymous class which
derives new DialogInterface.OnClickListener()

   4. When a method argument is an enum, code completion works on the
   corresponding enum, and adds the needed type.
   5. Automatically know how to modify R"code" for example here:
   ListView mListView = findViewById(R.id.notifications_list_view);
   it will suggest to typecast to ListView (to fix - again, control+enter).
   6. While debugging the values of variables are displayed inside the text
   editor, in light gray (no more looking for them in a panel).
   7. When using connect, using Niko's example, I would like to type
   connect(button, [clicked], this, [playTheFunkyMusic])
   and QtCreator should automagically find the signals of button, and the
   corresponding slots of "this". It used to work in ond style Qt4 signals,
   but with modern connections, I need to type the whole type. Some signals
   are hard to find, for example the "click()" signal from QButton comes from
   QAbstractButton. This means that when an object "has/provides" a signal, I
   need to guess the parent type which defined the signal in order connect it
   (I did not have to know this in Qt4).
   8. When I am lost "control+enter" usually fixe stuff for me.
   9. Multiple cursors (see the demo on SublimeText's home page - its epic,
   and Atom badly implements it),

Well basically, Android studio (and even XCode a little) helps me not
knowing the language by filling in the gaps for me. I know more C++ then
Java, but I am far more productive with Java - because the IDE does a lot
of heavy lifting.

Not saying that QtCreator is not good, but blindly claiming it's the best
is not always true. Its even possible that some things are working in
QtC4... I need to re-check at home. I should also open official feature
requests and not complaining on a ML. I agree.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

BTW I think you are replying to the person instead of list address.
list can not see your replies if you dont send it to the list.

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com



> On 04 Apr 2016, at 13:47, Nikos Chantziaras  wrote:
> 
> On 04/04/16 13:29, Alexey Rusakov wrote:
>> I don't know what I'm doing wrong but the new compile-time-checked
>> syntax is auto-completed by my Qt Creator (that came with Qt 5.5.1) as
>> well :)
> 
> With the clang code model? (Which is the only even remotely useful choice for 
> modern C++.)
> 
> 
>> and you're a bit blunt on not recommending the older syntax.
>> Apparently you haven't spent enough time with QML.
> 
> QML is a run-time thing, so the new syntax doesn't apply. For C++ code, the 
> new syntax is better, and also mandatory for lambdas. You cannot use the old 
> syntax even if you wanted to.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 04/04/16 13:29, Alexey Rusakov wrote:

I don't know what I'm doing wrong but the new compile-time-checked
syntax is auto-completed by my Qt Creator (that came with Qt 5.5.1) as
well :)


With the clang code model? (Which is the only even remotely useful 
choice for modern C++.)




and you're a bit blunt on not recommending the older syntax.
Apparently you haven't spent enough time with QML.


QML is a run-time thing, so the new syntax doesn't apply. For C++ code, 
the new syntax is better, and also mandatory for lambdas. You cannot use 
the old syntax even if you wanted to.

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nikos Chantziaras]

It only works with the old, Qt4 string/macro-based syntax (using the 
SLOT and SIGNAL macros.) Which is totally unsafe and I don't use it 
anymore (I wouldn't even recommend it to anyone.) The new syntax, which 
is statically checked (compile time) and thus type-safe, even though 
it's the recommended one by Qt, is not supported in Creator using the 
clang model. This does not auto-complete:


  connect(this, &MyWidget::mySignal, control, &MyControl::mySlot);

This is not the end of the world, but still it's unpleasant to work with.

The clang code model will get better in the future, I'm sure of it. But 
right now, it's pain all the way down.


The lacking auto-completion might not even be the worst of it. In the 
end, that's "just" a productivity and convenience issue. The lack of 
reliable "find all uses" in the clang model is actually a more serious 
problem, since if you trust it you're left with the false sense of 
security that you caught all the places in your code where a symbol was 
used and made whatever changes you needed to make to fix an issue. But 
it doesn't find all uses. Which is *dangerous*. So I have to do a 
text-based, project-wide search for a string instead to actually get to 
all uses of the symbol and update my code.



On 04/04/16 11:42, Alexey Rusakov wrote:

Not sure what I'm doing wrong but auto-completion for connect() does
work for me. Moreover, I don't expect CLion to be able to work with
SIGNAL() and SLOT() notation without Qt-aware plugin.

I might expect CLion to rule them all in some indefinite future but very
hardly at the moment. Disclaimer: I am a switch-over from CLion to Qt
Creator, exactly because Qt Creator worked for me much better than CLion
for CMake-based Qt-using projects.



On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:13 AM -0700, "Nikos Chantziaras"
mailto:rea...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On 03/04/16 22:00, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On domingo, 3 de abril de 2016 21:07:00 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:
>> Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me?
>> Does Qt plan to do something about this?
>
> It would be more constructive if you explained what your issues are and 
what
> you findto be unpleasant. Without that, nothing is ever going to happen.

I assume the same things as the rest of us, perhaps:

* Lack of auto-completion for connect().
* Very slow auto-completion.
* Generally auto-completion sometimes work, sometimes doesn't.
* "Find uses" doesn't work, so you have to grep to find uses.
* It gets very confused with smart pointers and templates in general.
* Sometimes doesn't highlight local uses.

This is the clang code model, and these things are a major PITA.

The Creator code model was excellent for C++98. The last few months, I
complete switched my projects to C++14, and that code model is now
useless, so clang is the only choice. And it's not very pleasant to work
with. In fact, I'd say it's very unpleasant.

___
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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[ekke]

Am 04.04.16 um 10:12 schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
> On 03/04/16 22:00, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> On domingo, 3 de abril de 2016 21:07:00 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:
>>> Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like
>>> me?
>>> Does Qt plan to do something about this?
>>
>> It would be more constructive if you explained what your issues are
>> and what
>> you findto be unpleasant. Without that, nothing is ever going to happen.
>
> I assume the same things as the rest of us, perhaps:
>
> * Lack of auto-completion for connect().
> * Very slow auto-completion.
> * Generally auto-completion sometimes work, sometimes doesn't.
> * "Find uses" doesn't work, so you have to grep to find uses.
> * It gets very confused with smart pointers and templates in general.
> * Sometimes doesn't highlight local uses.
>
> This is the clang code model, and these things are a major PITA.
>
> The Creator code model was excellent for C++98. The last few months, I
> complete switched my projects to C++14, and that code model is now
> useless, so clang is the only choice. And it's not very pleasant to
> work with. In fact, I'd say it's very unpleasant.
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>
I'm using Qt Creator only for mobile app development

for me coming from Eclipse Momentics (BlackBerry 10, Qt 4.8 / Cascades)
I'm really missing:
* Tabs to edit files
* Running multiple mobile devices at the same time from inside Eclipse
with easy switching between Consol outputs etc
* Hiding all the translation stuff (ts, qm, lupdate, ...) by simply
adding the languages to a project
* no sync with underlying file-system to enable easy drag'n'drop of
ressources or src files
* and yes, auto-completion and refactoring of Eclipse is unmatched

on the other side I know QtCreator has to support much more different
targets compared with Momentics for Cascades or Android Studio for Android.
also my first steps with QtCreator to create new project and deploy to
Android and iOS devices went well - it worked out of the box.
I'll create feature requests, but at first will do some more work with
QtCreator to become more familiar

Now with qt.labs.controls in Qt 5.6 and starting with Qt 5.7 from my POV
Qt is a great way to develop mobile applications and they're really
looking great with Material Style. Also the new Startup /
ind.dev-license is attractive to motivate mobile developers to try out Qt.
Feedback I got was always, that it's hard to start with QtCreator coming
from Android Studio or Eclipse.
I'll blog about my experiences and provide recipes to make it easier for
mobile developers to start with Qt.

-- 

ekke (ekkehard gentz)

independent software architect
international development native mobile business apps
BlackBerry 10 | Qt Mobile (Android, iOS)

blog: http://ekkes-corner.org
apps and more: http://appbus.org
twitter: @ekkescorner
skype: ekkes-corner
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/ekkehard/

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 03/04/16 22:00, Thiago Macieira wrote:

On domingo, 3 de abril de 2016 21:07:00 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:

Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me?
Does Qt plan to do something about this?


It would be more constructive if you explained what your issues are and what
you findto be unpleasant. Without that, nothing is ever going to happen.


I assume the same things as the rest of us, perhaps:

* Lack of auto-completion for connect().
* Very slow auto-completion.
* Generally auto-completion sometimes work, sometimes doesn't.
* "Find uses" doesn't work, so you have to grep to find uses.
* It gets very confused with smart pointers and templates in general.
* Sometimes doesn't highlight local uses.

This is the clang code model, and these things are a major PITA.

The Creator code model was excellent for C++98. The last few months, I 
complete switched my projects to C++14, and that code model is now 
useless, so clang is the only choice. And it's not very pleasant to work 
with. In fact, I'd say it's very unpleasant.


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Bob Hood]

On 4/3/2016 1:41 PM, Emre Besirik wrote:
On 03 Apr 2016, at 22:18, Bob Hood > wrote:


On 4/3/2016 12:07 PM, Emre Besirik wrote:

Hello list,
I know its a little bit off-topic but I was wondering your ideas about the 
unpleasentness of coding with QtCreator (no offense, I respect the 
creators of the original IDE but..)
So there is this; https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-318 (in case 
you didn’t know already) do you support it?

Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me?


Actually, no I don't. Quite the contrary.  It has actually saved me when 
I've had to leave Visual Studio to work on OS X and Linux, because--with 
the right keyboard mapping--it is the closest cross-platform thing I've yet 
found to the "feel" of Visual Studio, where I spend most of my days.


So, I do not agree with you at all.  In may ways, I consider QtCreator to 
be my home-away-from-home.


Have you ever tried ANY jetbrains product? I do mean just for few days but 
really trying...


I have used PyCharm, but honestly, having a separate IDE just for Python is 
not practical since I can develop/debug Python right along side C/C++ in 
Visual Studio using an add-in.  If I needed to do so on a non-Windows 
platform, then I might not necessarily choose QtCreator.


I'm not saying the JetBrains wares are not good--quite the contrary--but since 
I'm a Qt developer, and I have used Visual Studio for decades, the choice of 
QtCreator for non-Windows platforms is a no-brainer.  And it's free, just like 
JetBrains' offerings (with the right license).


But be aware that you're talking to somebody who has written whole 
applications using nothing but vi and a command prompt.  I'm certainly not a 
/connoisseur/of IDEs.  ;)


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Bob Hood]

On 4/3/2016 12:07 PM, Emre Besirik wrote:

Hello list,
I know its a little bit off-topic but I was wondering your ideas about the 
unpleasentness of coding with QtCreator (no offense, I respect the creators 
of the original IDE but..)
So there is this; https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-318 (in case you 
didn’t know already) do you support it?

Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me?


Actually, no I don't.  Quite the contrary.  It has actually saved me when I've 
had to leave Visual Studio to work on OS X and Linux, because--with the right 
keyboard mapping--it is the closest cross-platform thing I've yet found to the 
"feel" of Visual Studio, where I spend most of my days.


So, I do not agree with you at all.  In may ways, I consider QtCreator to be 
my home-away-from-home.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Thiago Macieira]

On domingo, 3 de abril de 2016 21:07:00 PDT Emre Besirik wrote:
> Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me? 
> Does Qt plan to do something about this? 

It would be more constructive if you explained what your issues are and what 
you findto be unpleasant. Without that, nothing is ever going to happen.

But I have to say I don't feel any unpleasantness. Qt Creator is the best IDE 
I've ever used. There are some things I'd do differently, but that's all. I 
also expect that's how most Qt developers and especially the Qt Creator 
developers feel, so it's highly unlikely we'll do a complete change of 
direction.

> Does / Can Qt officially support and write a plugin for CLion maybe?

You can.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

[Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

[Emre Besirik]

Hello list,
I know its a little bit off-topic but I was wondering your ideas about the 
unpleasentness of coding with QtCreator (no offense, I respect the creators of 
the original IDE but..) 
So there is this; https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-318 
 (in case you didn’t know 
already) do you support it? 
Do you also find it a littlebit unpleasent to code in QtCreator like me? 
Does Qt plan to do something about this? 
Does / Can Qt officially support and write a plugin for CLion maybe?

Regards,
Emre Beşirik
nome...@gmail.com



___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest