Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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.

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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,

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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 > >

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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.

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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.

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

>> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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.

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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. > >

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

>> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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? > >

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> -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? > >

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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,

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

ect.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), >

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

From: NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 3:20 PM To: Curtis Mitch <mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com> Cc: interest@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator? On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Curtis Mitch <mitch.cur...@theqtco

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Curtis Mitch <mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: > > > > > *From:* NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, 5 April 2016 2:34 PM > *To:* Curtis Mitch <mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com> > *Cc:* interest@qt-project.o

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. I observe that most of you guys objecting are don't even see what others

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

From: NoMercy [mailto:nome...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, 5 April 2016 2:34 PM To: Curtis Mitch <mitch.cur...@theqtcompany.com> 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...@theqtco

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> -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?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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 -

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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.

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

> 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 >

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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

Re: [Interest] CLion to replace QtCreator?

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