On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 01:16:43PM +0200, Bogdan Vatra wrote: > c.2) back then, none of the existing build system could deliver enough > information to IDEs to enable prefect code completion (e.g. include > paths, defines, compiler flags, etc.) > ... > c.2) Incomplete! A while ago, I created a QBS plugin for KDevelop[1] > and I found some problems, see how QBS developers treat them here: > https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QBS-902 . That was the moment when I > started to have doubts :). > for all i can tell that's a rather poor bug report with little followup from you. that's where i start to have doubts whether you actually mean it. ;)
> d) last but not least a clean and easily maintainable code base that can be > used for the next decade(s). > ... > - Instread to port QBS to QML JS in the first second when QtScript was > deprecated, they fork it! I know that back then QML JS needed some love, but > instead to collaborate with QML JS folks they decided keep using QtScript! > IIRC a brave soul, port it to QML JS, but guess what, QBS devs reject it and > kept using QtScript! > - Even more, they found a few problem also in QML parser, and guess what, > they forked also QML! > both these items get a huge "so what?" in response. because they have no practical impact whatsoever. > To fix d) a large part of QBS must be reorganized/rewritten, > i see no actual evidence of that. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
