Den 01-02-2013 09:06, Mark Summerfield skrev: > Hi Shawn, > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 12:50:53 +0000 > Rutledge Shawn <shawn.rutle...@digia.com> wrote: > [snip] >>>>> - Would this mean that QML would be able to access all or most of >>>>> the Qt C++ APIs (e.g., QFile, etc.)? >>>> No, adding new QtQuick APIs is still more work that needs to be done. >>> That's a decision I've seen debated a few times here. On one hand, QML >>> feels like a limited tool if you don't have access to the full Qt API >>> or at least a much larger subset of it. OTOH, ATM all non-trivial QML >>> apps need a C++ side anyway, so why not let people code the C++ >>> instead of trying to wrap everything. >>> >>> The javascript side also has a lot of limitations. Especially because >>> there is no available framework to do real work. JS is pretty much >>> restricted to manipulate the QML objects. >>> >>> As the situation is right now, I don't see the point in making it >>> possible to run a QML only app. The environment is too weak for this >>> to make sense. Sure, there are probably a few apps you can do. But the >>> overwhelming amount of QML apps will need C++ coding as well. >> Yeah but it should get better over time. > ISTM that many people will want to create pure QML/JavaScript apps. Some > for rapid prototyping; some because their developer costs are more > important than runtime efficiency; and some---perhaps most---because > they want rapid development & are willing to resolve any efficiency > problems by dropping down to C++ when necessary. > > Is this where Qt is headed? Or will the Qt devs "hold the line" and > insist on the need for C++? FWIW I don't have any axe to grind either > way, I just want to know where things are going.
You probably won't get an answer to this, because I doubt anyone really know where this is heading. It's a HUGE task to expose the entire Qt API to QML, and it might not make sense or even map 1:1 to the QML code model, so no one will commit to this. I take a fairly laid back approach to this. If it happens, I might use this option. If not, I'll just do as I do right now, which is to always have C++ layers as well. Personally, I think this is one of the cases where it's better to let the project evolve than try to make a decision on what should be the direction. Bo Thorsen. -- Fionia Software - Qt experts for hire. _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
