On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:32 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
> This was old school grind it out trouble shooting which is not allowed
> under Agile.
My two cents: "$FOO is not allowed" *screams* "not agile".
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
This would be the second 2 fatal flaws with Agile.
Developer's choice
1 and done mentality/management. Actually that is better than some of
the Agile groups at equipment manufacturers, some of them demand their
developers commit 3 completed stories per day.
Big ugly Ogre on steroids type bug
> In years prior it was not uncommon to find major corporations with teams
> of 40+ developers, many of them consultants, developing systems for
> internal consumption. Large projects took (and still take) a minimum of
> 7 years to spec, develop, test, install and finally settle in. During
> th
Am 18.10.2016 um 13:41 schrieb Viktor Engelmann:
I'm not even on board for TDD, because tests don't help you against
interlocking-issues, data races, etc. and are only of limited use
against many others like dangling pointers, subsequent memory
corruption, UI freezing, etc.
This is a really int
On 10/18/2016 07:00 AM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
It's hard to
know when you're really done because you don't really have metrics to tell
you--or the customer--when the project/is/ done.
Per the 1985 accounting rules change, if you have a definition of "done"
you cannot book the
On 10/18/2016 07:00 AM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
I'm not even on board for TDD, because tests don't help you against
interlocking-issues, data races, etc. and are only of limited use
against many others like dangling pointers, subsequent memory
corruption, UI freezing, etc.
Tests ca
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Viktor Engelmann
wrote:
>
> A key part in that article: *"A complex back-end data services hub — a
> piece of software with zero actual, living, breathing end-users — has to be
> described in terms of “user” stories. Does something sound off-key to you?
> It shoul
Am 18.10.2016 um 12:31 schrieb Roland Hughes:
> https://gcn.com/blogs/reality-check/2013/11/healthcare-agile.aspx
>
> Contrary to your opinion, Healthcare.gov is a shining example of the
> faster-cheaper-splat that is Agile.
A key part in that article: /"A complex back-end data services hub — a
p
On 10/17/2016 10:30 AM, Jason H wrote:
On 10/04/2016 06:31 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
Similarly Healthcare.gov started off not Agile and ended Agile.
Clearly, the problem isn't the methodology, it is your application of
it.
You know, I can forgive most of the dis-information
> On 10/04/2016 06:31 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
> > I think the bigger issue, that many people have expressed here, but not
> > said as such, is the Qt release cycle is not Agile.
> I would thank God it is not, but the rest of your post proves that it is.
> > As more teams adopt A
You haven't highlighted any problem with Agile the methodology. You have only highlighted problems with the skills of your team, or at worst, how your team implements Agile. I don't disagree that having a thought-out event lifecycle approach isn't important, and I'd argue that it should have it's o
On 10/15/2016 6:59 PM, Roland Hughes wrote:
When you work off nothing but stories you are hacking on the fly...
Ok, since I've responded to this before (perhaps this should be a different
thread?), I'll jump in there again and clarify where /I'm/ coming from...
First, let me say I embrace Ag
On 2016-10-15 20:59, Roland Hughes wrote:
> On 09/28/2016 12:25 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
>
> Don't you have unit tests?
>
> Yes. But which is better, to be forced to use an inherently error-prone
> language (JavaScript) and rely on unit tests to clean up the mess, or to
> use a
This would be the second 2 fatal flaws with Agile.
Developer's choice
1 and done mentality/management. Actually that is better than some of
the Agile groups at equipment manufacturers, some of them demand their
developers commit 3 completed stories per day.
Big ugly Ogre on steroids type bug
On 10/04/2016 06:31 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
I think the bigger issue, that many people have expressed here, but not said as
such, is the Qt release cycle is not Agile.
I would thank God it is not, but the rest of your post proves that it is.
As more teams adopt Agile develo
On 09/28/2016 12:25 PM, interest-requ...@qt-project.org wrote:
Don't you have unit tests?
Yes. But which is better, to be forced to use an inherently error-prone
language (JavaScript) and rely on unit tests to clean up the mess, or to
use a robust modern language (C++) and have less bugs to fin
[Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
From: Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com>
>> There isn't, because developer selects the bugs they're going to fix.
>> There's common procedure.
> Oops, this came out wrong after reediting. I meant that the
To come back to the original topic:
I dislike about Qt Creator that you cannot easily create and then use
custom widgets.
You have to read lots of documentation on how to make a Qt Creator
_Plugin_ (and I remember the useless error messages I got when the
plugin-interface changed between Qt 3 and
> -Original Message-
> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+tuukka.turunen=qt.io@qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
> Sent: keskiviikkona 5. lokakuuta 2016 12.34
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
Em quarta-feira, 5 de outubro de 2016, às 19:48:00 CEST, John C. Turnbull
escreveu:
> You did mention though that The Qt Company has SLAs and will try to
> reproduce problems etc., but what if I just want to say things like "I want
> this feature" or "I don't think this feature is implemented in t
OK, thanks Thiago, it seems we do understand each other.
And it also seems that I am indeed venting my frustrations in an inappropriate
forum (as you pointed out that this list is related to the open source
project). Sorry about that.
You did mention though that The Qt Company has SLAs and will
Em quarta-feira, 5 de outubro de 2016, às 07:27:38 CEST, Kai Koehne escreveu:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+kai.koehne=qt...@qt-project.org]
> > [...]
> > But maybe there is a need for some
> > sort of regular high-level review of bugs to identify those
> -Original Message-
> From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+kai.koehne=qt...@qt-project.org]
> [...]
> But maybe there is a need for some
> sort of regular high-level review of bugs to identify those that are having
> the
> worst customer impact and need to be looked at by the devs.
Th
Em quarta-feira, 5 de outubro de 2016, às 13:59:17 CEST, Rob Allan escreveu:
> Doesn't this really cut to the heart of what John is complaining about -
> Agile or non-Agile aside? The issue seems to be that there is no
> well-defined or over-arching policy or procedure for choosing what bugs to
> f
Em quarta-feira, 5 de outubro de 2016, às 10:33:37 CEST, John C. Turnbull
escreveu:
> Thiago, it seems you have taken my comments as a personal attack on you and
> you have responded (naturally) in a defensive way.
>
> Well, I tried to make it very clear from my opening sentence that this was
> *
From: Thiago Macieira
>> There isn't, because developer selects the bugs they're going to fix.
>> There's common procedure.
> Oops, this came out wrong after reediting. I meant that there is no common
> procedure, each developer chooses the bugs however they wish.
Doesn't this really cut to the
Thiago, it seems you have taken my comments as a personal attack on you and you
have responded (naturally) in a defensive way.
Well, I tried to make it very clear from my opening sentence that this was
*not* a personal attack on you (or anyone else for that matter). In fact, I
*thought* I made
Em quarta-feira, 5 de outubro de 2016, às 08:13:38 CEST, John C. Turnbull
escreveu:
> Thiago, with all due respect, and I'm very aware of the significant
> contribution you personally have made to both the Qt product and the
> community, there is clearly a high degree of dissatisfaction with vario
Em terça-feira, 4 de outubro de 2016, às 22:37:20 CEST, Thiago Macieira
escreveu:
> There isn't, because developer selects the bugs they're going to fix.
> There's common procedure.
Oops, this came out wrong after reediting. I meant that there is no common
procedure, each developer chooses the b
Thiago, with all due respect, and I'm very aware of the significant
contribution you personally have made to both the Qt product and the community,
there is clearly a high degree of dissatisfaction with various aspects of Qt
and the management of the SDLC.
Your comments may be accurate but I'm
Em terça-feira, 4 de outubro de 2016, às 16:03:00 CEST, Jason H escreveu:
> I think the bigger issue, that many people have expressed here, but not said
> as such, is the Qt release cycle is not Agile.
It's as fast as it can be. We can't release faster than it is because the
steps just take too
PS. If you're hating on Agile because you fear the transparency, or are concerned about your reputation, I think your days are limited. Also see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SARbwvhupQ
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 at 11:40 AM
From: "Tim O'Neil"
To: interest@qt-pr
I can tell you all from direct experience Agile is not a one-size-fits-all
tool. Its a tool, best used in mid-sized to larger organizations trying to
build software. Its not at all appropriate for smaller shops. Kanban works
just fine in those.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Ronan Jouchet <
ronan
On 2016-10-04 10:28, Bob Hood wrote:
Like Spiral from whence it sprung, I think Agile works wonderfully
in certain project profiles. However, not everybody drinks the
all-Agile-all-the-time Kool-Aid®. Contrary to popular religion,
Agile is not the savior of the industry. It's another tool in th
On 10/4/2016 8:03 AM, Jason H wrote:
I think the bigger issue, that many people have expressed here, but not said as
such, is the Qt release cycle is not Agile. As more teams adopt Agile
development practices...
http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/agile-dead-matthew-kern
Like Spiral from whence it
the incorporation of a regular search of that nature would immensely
improve the product. I don't think there is any transparency in the selected
for fix criteria?
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 at 5:56 AM
> From: "John C. Turnbull"
> To: "Bernhard Lindner"
I was hired on to my new job because of my Qt4 experience, and my
first QML related task was to convert a list view to a editable tree
view with drag and drop. It was not a good experience. The TreeView
control provided in Qt was full of bugs and I ended up pulling its
private C++ model adaptor int
It's ironic in a way that every major graphical toolkit (and with many large
software projects in general) that I've worked with over decades now, the
attitude has commonly seemed to have been that "new" is better than "stable".
The end result is a product full of both older and newer unstable f
1. New features (quantity) are priorized over bug fixing (quality). Suggestions
are almost sensless. I reduced writing bug reports and totally gave up writing
suggestions due to this.
2. Widgets have too low priority. In general new fancy features are priorized
above bread-and-butter features f
Some things that i don't like:
-Qt uses own container classes (QList, QVector, etc.) instead STL
containers (or some kind of STL derived containers).
-Qt on Android: still big output APK size
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:20 PM, Sérgio Martins
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> It's not unusual for us developers
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:43:37AM +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> > I quite like QML as a declarative markup language, but am less enthused
> > about
> > JavaScript. It seems like kind of a toy programming language. I'm a bit
> > shocked that you can write "code" where you can happily call fun
Konrad:
> Also: Javascript is not an OO language: you are supposed to have classes, not
> prototypes, for OO.
ES6 has proper classes.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Classes
Rob:
> I quite like QML as a declarative markup language, but am less enthused about
>
On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:57:01 Rob Allan wrote:
> But even
> then, in most OO languages, this is implemented through strongly-typed
> interfaces - so that if you tried to "publish" a message that wasn't
> defined, you would get a compile error. Most OO languages - Smalltalk, C++
> C#, et
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Konstantin Tokarev
wrote:
>
> Qt metaobject system has same properties, e.g. you can assign or read
> non-existing properties, connect to missing slots, etc.
And thanks god using it like this isn't necessary to make Qt apps.
> Enter OOP. In classic OOP there are no function calls, you just send
messages to object, and object dispatches
> them "somehow"
I don't think that sort of anonymous, decoupled messaging is the definition
of OOP. It is perhaps a description of the Observer Pattern, where the
"publisher" has no id
- Forwarded message --
>> From: Bo Thorsen
>> To: interest@qt-project.org
>> Cc:
>> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 08:18:26 +0200
>> Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
>> Den 21-09-2016 kl. 23:53 skrev André Pönitz:
>>> On Wed, Sep
uce a more robust application if all of your
coding could be done in C++ and none in JavaScript.
Rob
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Bo Thorsen
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 08:18:26 +0200
> Subject: Re: [Interest] What don&#
x27;ve never seen it claimed that voting matters 1 iota.
>>
>> I guess what we're asking for here is more prioritization transparency?
>>
>>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 2:27 AM
>> *From:* "Vlad Stelmahovsky"
>> *To:* "Jason
6 at 2:27 AM
> *From:* "Vlad Stelmahovsky"
> *To:* "Jason H"
> *Cc:* interest
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
> Actually you can vote for it and promote to other users to vote for it.
> More votes - more chances issue to be solv
I've never seen it claimed that voting matters 1 iota.
I guess what we're asking for here is more prioritization transparency?
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 2:27 AM
From: "Vlad Stelmahovsky"
To: "Jason H"
Cc: interest
Subject: Re: [Interest
t;Jason H"
>
> > Cc: interest , "Rob Allan" <
> rob_al...@trimble.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
> >
> >
> >
> > 21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" com>:
> > > Hey,
Den 21-09-2016 kl. 23:53 skrev André Pönitz:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 05:42:44AM +, Shawn Rutledge wrote:
On Sep 20, 2016, at 22:52, Rob Allan wrote:
My biggest gripe is that the Qt Quick object model seems to be much
more poorly supported in C++ than it is in QML. For example, in C++
you
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 05:42:44AM +, Shawn Rutledge wrote:
>
> On Sep 20, 2016, at 22:52, Rob Allan wrote:
> > My biggest gripe is that the Qt Quick object model seems to be much
> > more poorly supported in C++ than it is in QML. For example, in C++
> > you really only have access to QQuick
On quarta-feira, 21 de setembro de 2016 09:08:09 PDT André Somers wrote:
> Op 20/09/2016 om 22:09 schreef Alejandro Exojo:
> > On Monday 19 September 2016 18:35:43 Etienne Sandré-Chardonnal wrote:
> >> Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
> >> slots across a queue
on, but it's effectively out of my hands.
>
>
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 8:35 AM
> > From: "Konstantin Tokarev"
> > To: "Jean-Michaël Celerier" , "Jason H"
>
> > Cc: interest , "Rob Allan" <
> r
uot;Konstantin Tokarev"
> To: "Jean-Michaël Celerier" , "Jason H"
>
> Cc: interest , "Rob Allan"
> Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
>
>
>
> 21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" :
> > He
21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" :
> Hey, there is a lot of interesting points in all these answers; some
> similars, some not.
>
> Maybe a good way forward would be to try to pinpoint the problems more
> precisely with an online platform such
> as http://en.arguman.org/ ? Or even jus
Hey, there is a lot of interesting points in all these answers; some
similars, some not.
Maybe a good way forward would be to try to pinpoint the problems more
precisely with an online platform such
as http://en.arguman.org/ ? Or even just some kind of google doc...
Starting from there would mayb
> I also can't help making a comparison with two other popular layout
> frameworks: WPF/XAML, and Android/AXML. In both of these worlds, the markup
> language and the "code-behind" class hierarchy of UI elements are
> absolutely equivalent 1st class citizens. Anything you can do in XAML, you
> can
I switched from qmake to cmake some five+ years ago and while I don't
regret it, it takes the 'I' out of all the IDEs I use. No class wizard or
real refactoring. Creating a new class or worse library or project takes a
lot of blind text editing. This could only be fixed by a full fledged QBS I
gues
Op 20/09/2016 om 22:09 schreef Alejandro Exojo:
On Monday 19 September 2016 18:35:43 Etienne Sandré-Chardonnal wrote:
Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
slots across a queued connection, unless I'm wrong. You have to make your
object implicitely shared. Thi
On Sep 20, 2016, at 22:52, Rob Allan wrote:
> My biggest gripe is that the Qt Quick object model seems to be much more
> poorly supported in C++ than it is in QML. For example, in C++ you really
> only have access to QQuickItem - none of its derived classes are documented,
> and their interfac
I'm fairly new to Qt (a few months), but am already very impressed by its
power and overall quality. I'm also super impressed that the user-base is
being asked about what they don't like - so many providers of tools or
services just don't want to hear this stuff! So much kudos to the
developers for
I could also add the enum exposition to Qml, would be nice to have them
inside their own name and a way to auto map int to string value. we always
have to it manually to convert back and forth for available string/int
value. an object that would wrap the enum and have the following properties:
C++
On Monday 19 September 2016 18:35:43 Etienne Sandré-Chardonnal wrote:
> Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
> slots across a queued connection, unless I'm wrong. You have to make your
> object implicitely shared. This causes lots of copies when passing a
> std::v
Op 19/09/2016 om 22:49 schreef Thiago Macieira:
On segunda-feira, 19 de setembro de 2016 18:35:43 PDT Etienne Sandré-
Chardonnal wrote:
Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
slots across a queued connection, unless I'm wrong. You have to make your
object impli
On segunda-feira, 19 de setembro de 2016 18:35:43 PDT Etienne Sandré-
Chardonnal wrote:
> Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
> slots across a queued connection, unless I'm wrong. You have to make your
> object implicitely shared. This causes lots of copies when
To: "interest@qt-project.org"
Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?
For myself I would love to see those changes (mostly to Qml, the C++ part is fairly striaght forward and we mostly no more used QWidgets):
Ability to extend or declare basic type into Qml (no
On 19/09/2016 17:35, Etienne Sandré-Chardonnal wrote:
Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
slots across a queued connection, unless I'm wrong. You have to make
your object implicitely shared. This causes lots of copies when passing
a std::vector, for instance.
For myself I would love to see those changes (mostly to Qml, the C++ part
is fairly striaght forward and we mostly no more used QWidgets):
1. Ability to extend or declare basic type into Qml (not only QObject),
QQuaternion QMatrix4x4 functions are too limited and it's painful to have a
s
19.09.2016, 21:54, "André Pönitz" :
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 09:20:43PM +0100, Sérgio Martins wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It's not unusual for us developers and contributors to lose
>> perspective of what's important.
>> After many years spent on very particular implementation details, it
>> become
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 09:20:43PM +0100, Sérgio Martins wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> It's not unusual for us developers and contributors to lose
> perspective of what's important.
> After many years spent on very particular implementation details, it
> becomes difficult to see outside of the box.
>
> And
Yes, but for instance you can't move-pass an object between signals and
slots across a queued connection, unless I'm wrong. You have to make your
object implicitely shared. This causes lots of copies when passing a
std::vector, for instance.
2016-09-19 18:10 GMT+02:00 Konstantin Tokarev :
>
>
> 1
19.09.2016, 19:09, "Thiago Macieira" :
> On segunda-feira, 19 de setembro de 2016 10:40:08 PDT Etienne Sandré-
> Chardonnal wrote:
>> - C++ style is a little bit outdated (no move semantics fir instance)
>
> Move semantics support have been in Qt since 5.0 or so.
4.8
http://doc.qt.io/qt-4.8
On segunda-feira, 19 de setembro de 2016 10:40:08 PDT Etienne Sandré-
Chardonnal wrote:
>- C++ style is a little bit outdated (no move semantics fir instance)
Move semantics support have been in Qt since 5.0 or so.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - In
1. Qt progresses at a glacial pace, and often neglects the more urgent/parity
issues.
- a. As more organizations adopt agile, this becomes all that more apparent.
I've got to wait for a year for a code change to hit a release? Sorry, that's
just too long.
- b. Basic stuff like controlling the LE
On 19/09/2016 9:11 AM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
19.09.2016, 16:08, "Henry Skoglund" :
Ok here's my number #1 complaint:
the MaintenanceTool app, when you start it, why is the default selected
choice to remove Qt??? It should be to update Qt of course.
(Such a design could get you fired if y
19.09.2016, 16:08, "Henry Skoglund" :
> Ok here's my number #1 complaint:
>
> the MaintenanceTool app, when you start it, why is the default selected
> choice to remove Qt??? It should be to update Qt of course.
>
> (Such a design could get you fired if you worked for say, Microsoft. :=)
I'd rat
Ok here's my number #1 complaint:
the MaintenanceTool app, when you start it, why is the default selected
choice to remove Qt??? It should be to update Qt of course.
(Such a design could get you fired if you worked for say, Microsoft. :=)
Rgrds Henry
On 2016-09-19 05:20, Bo Thorsen wrote:
* Designer plugin development/deployment sucks (should be in a
scripting language or json, and should be possible to do per project)
I don't know if you count Python as a scripting language or not, but
just in case, you can do this with PyQt.
http://p
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 21:20:43 +0100, Sérgio Martins wrote:
> Please state your top ones, even if it was already stated by someone
> else, so we have an idea about which ones matter more.
a) C++ ( far beyond everything else )
The 2 language approach is a pain. In our application we have thousands
On 19 September 2016 at 17:20, Michael Sué wrote:
> Hi,
>
> - nothing new for widgets.
> - not yet full support for VS 2015, missing "Addin" that is, for more than a
> year now.
> - missing C++ support for mobile platforms.
> - unusable Docs for Qt3D.
>
> Best, Michael.
Hi Michael,
Regarding VS
On 19 September 2016 at 01:14, Nate Rogers via Interest
wrote:
>
> I'm a Linux user but a guy at work was trying out Qt on windows for a project
> he was working on. He tried the new installer and it didn't come
> preconfigured with a compiler like it used to. I didn't have time to trouble
> sh
Hi,
- nothing new for widgets.
- not yet full support for VS 2015, missing "Addin" that is, for more than a
year now.
- missing C++ support for mobile platforms.
- unusable Docs for Qt3D.
Best, Michael.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.or
Okay, I'll bite:
* Poor standard of some modules - Qt Multimedia and Qt Components especially
* Too much focus on features instead of fixing bugs
* Designer plugin development/deployment sucks (should be in a scripting
language or json, and should be possible to do per project)
* Current gerrit
1) I don't like the distribution being so monolithic.
I'd rather see the packages being shipped individually and having explicit
version dependencies, like QML modules do and like qpm.io is doing.
Maybe this kind of approach will be easier/possible with the new config
system?
2) I don't like qml
Hi,
I have a some missing things for nearly all topics Qt covers:
1. moc is lacking some sort of plugin mechanism. If there where, developers
could extend the autocreation of QObjects, with their own ideas.
2. The build system, qmake. It feels very unusable and you have to use a lot
of hidden
Qt Commercial user here.
I do not like:
- Long time to get bugs fixed
- QtQuick requires switching to QML and is not usable directly in C++
- Widgets development got less attention due to QtQuick development.
HiDPI support was a good idea but it introduced many bugs
- C++ style is
> On 18 Sep 2016, at 02:37, Xavier Bigand wrote:
>
> I am using Qt for my day job,
>
> Our first difficulty with Qt is the release cycle that is really long and the
> difficulty to test the futur versions.
> As we often need the latest features or bug fixes, waiting 3-4 month isn't
> possible
Qt 5.7 has a lot of improves and I think that you should use this version…
I have no problem installing Qt on Windows… I install VS Community Edition
with the compilers for C++ and then, I use the online installer for Windows
given by Qt website… Also, you need to know that you should install Wind
I'm a Linux user but a guy at work was trying out Qt on windows for a project
he was working on. He tried the new installer and it didn't come preconfigured
with a compiler like it used to. I didn't have time to trouble shoot it so I
just had him download 5.5 because that one works without any m
Hi Nate, I’m a macOS user and I hate Windows, but right now I’m involve in
a big project developed with QML, Qt Widgets and C++ (because we have
various apps for desktop and mobile).
In Windows I only had problem with the compiler from Visual Studio, which
has a lot of problem with the compatibili
I like C++ & QML. I don't like that the new version of Qt for windows is so
hard to get working! Qt 5.5 worked right out of the box, no need to monkey
around with compilers and everything else. I really don't like that
Nate
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:48 PM, B
On 18 September 2016 at 21:56, Bob Hood wrote:
> On 9/18/2016 2:43 AM, Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote:
>
>> Some things that bother me :
>>
>> * Features being QML-only instead of being usable from C++. I like coding
>> in C++ (but I agree it's hard).
>>
>
> This is certainly arguable. For some, I
It would be more confortable to have more artifacts for 2 reasons :
1. As we constantly update our product based on Qt (our release cycle is
between 3 and 6 months), reducing the delay to migrate to the latest
version of Qt (to improve the stability, performances, compatibility,...)
when come clos
On 9/18/2016 2:43 AM, Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote:
Some things that bother me :
* Features being QML-only instead of being usable from C++. I like coding in
C++ (but I agree it's hard).
This is certainly arguable. For some, I guess coding in C++ is hard. For
others, it's as natural as brea
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 02:37:01AM +0200, Xavier Bigand wrote:
> I am using Qt for my day job,
>
> Our first difficulty with Qt is the release cycle that is really long and the
> difficulty to test the futur versions. As we often need the latest features
> or
> bug fixes, waiting 3-4 month isn't
Some things that bother me :
* The (perceived) lack of stability with QtQuick / QML : first there was
QtQuick with 4.8, then QtQuick 2.0, maybe QtQuick 3.0 with Qt 6 ? Then
Controls 1.0, then Controls 2.0 ... everytime with a somewhat short
life-span, which makes it a pain when looking for documen
I am using Qt for my day job,
Our first difficulty with Qt is the release cycle that is really long and
the difficulty to test the futur versions.
As we often need the latest features or bug fixes, waiting 3-4 month isn't
possible, and some times we just implement our self features or use
workarou
> From what I see, IPTV industry is massively switching away from Qt because
> LGPL3 is incompatible with clients’ requirements
I’m just from IBC (http://www.ibc.org) and I didn’t see much “switching away
from Qt” there. What I saw was switching from LGPL v2.1 to commercial license.
---
Artem S
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
