> feature creep, the project
> uses ancient paradigms
> tends to overtake all your structures
> slow
> I don’t like it
Seriously?...
> feature creep, the project
> uses ancient paradigms
> tends to overtake all your structures
> slow
> I don’t like it
Seriously?...
In the open-source world: Krita, Scribus, Texmaker.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_that_uses_Qt
This is going to be a very limited list though, for instance there are dozens of applications in my domain that use Qt, and none of them are on this list.
I mean, just run a `find Qt5Core.dll` on windows or `find QtCore` on mac and see what's using Qt on your machine
DaVinci Resolve
I mean, how many projects he listed that supported any kind of UI design tool?
To me, Qt is still leaps and bounds beyond any alternative, not only in is design-centric tooling but also ease of use. Doubly so with Qt Quick. I find it quite strange that those aspects of Qt aren't readily noticed by someone who bothers to produce a list of C++ UI toolkits
It is leaps and bounds beyond other things - but those leaps and bounds are into the past.
That statement lies somewhere between simplistic and out-right wrong. Qt uses pointers just like C++'s smart pointers use pointers.
https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/objecttrees.html
Moreover, Qt also provides a collection of smart pointers, which are used quite extensively by Qt.
https://wiki.qt.io/Smart_Pointers
> meta-objects, pre-precompiler
I fail to see the point of your complaint. Besides the fact that Qt's "pre-compiler" is used to transparently support stuff such as UI design tooling and Qt's resource system (which handles embedding images and i8n), Qt's meta-object system also adds the boilerplate code that implements stuff such as event loops, IPC, observers, and message-passing.
So, actually, what's your point?
This complaint is particularly absurd if we compare Qt with unquestionably modern technologies such as the Android stack, whose build process is jam-packed with precompiler steps and whose project trees are filled to the brim with XML-based DSLs.
> inheritance over templates, little use of the standard library
These complaints make absolutely no sense at all.
> need I say more?
...Yes? You actually failed to make a single point, let alone presented a rational argument to back your assertion.
> It is leaps and bounds beyond other things - but those leaps and bounds are into the past.
This jab is simply stupid, more so in light of your complains.
FWIW this is a plus :-P i prefer working with Qt's containers and strings than STL (not specific to Qt really, i prefer almost any other container, string, etc library than STL, the API of which i find very unintuitive). Qt isn't just a library really, it is a framework you build your application around, when you use it you are supposed to buy in everything it does.
- how do you implement reflection without either ugly macros or a precompiler?
- how do you implement metaclasses without a meraobject ? (e.g. how would you list all the methods or properties of a class)
- how do you implement a tree structure where the parents knows its children and the children know its parent in modern C++ (or Rust without unsafe :-)) ?
And even besides QML, stuff like QGraphicsScene isn't really what I would call slow for CPU-based 2D graphics. It's good enough to be the rendering system for e.g. ECAD design tools.