Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> 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 >

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

t@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [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 mean

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> -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? >

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> -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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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 >

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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 >

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

ect.org Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt? 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 thos

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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 <

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

<priv...@bernhard-lindner.de> > Cc: interest@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt? > > 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

rded message ------ >> From: Bo Thorsen <b...@vikingsoft.eu> >> 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: >&

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

on if all of your coding could be done in C++ and none in JavaScript. Rob > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Bo Thorsen <b...@vikingsoft.eu> > To: interest@qt-project.org > Cc: > Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 08:18:26 +0200 > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

gmail.com> >> *To:* "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> >> *Cc:* interest <interest@qt-project.org> >> >> *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 -

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

mber 22, 2016 at 2:27 AM > *From:* "Vlad Stelmahovsky" <vladstelmahov...@gmail.com> > *To:* "Jason H" <jh...@gmx.com> > *Cc:* interest <interest@qt-project.org> > > *Subject:* Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt? > Actually you can vote for

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

om> Cc: interest <interest@qt-project.org> 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 solved   On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wro

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

haël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>, "Jason H" > <jh...@gmx.com> > > Cc: interest <interest@qt-project.org>, "Rob Allan" < > rob_al...@trimble.com> > > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt? > >

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

; <jh...@gmx.com> > > Cc: interest <interest@qt-project.org>, "Rob Allan" < > rob_al...@trimble.com> > > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt? > > > > > > > > 21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmi

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

arev" <annu...@yandex.ru> > To: "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>, "Jason H" > <jh...@gmx.com> > Cc: interest <interest@qt-project.org>, "Rob Allan" <rob_al...@trimble.com> > Subject: Re: [Int

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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:

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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 >

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

ut" <jer...@bodycad.com> To: "interest@qt-project.org" <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):  

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

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): 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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. > >

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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 -

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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.

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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,

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

> 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

Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt?

17.09.2016, 23:21, "Sérgio Martins" : > 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