On 07/31/2018 07:10 AM, Michael Jackson wrote:
Maybe you should have tried another Linux distribution? I've never had a 
problem loading any of the QtCreators on our Ubuntu boxes (starting with 14.04 
up and through 18.04).
Well you should have since everybody else did and the Ubuntu forums were awash with requests for work arounds. I'm guessing it's because you really use Windows for development and cross compile elsewhere.

While the jury is still out if QML is a success or not I think that attempting to give 
developers quicker ways to build applications is something that should be pursued. What 
is wrong with wanting a more efficient way to create our applications. What is wrong with 
wanting to make our applications appeal to the "younger crowd" by using newer 
technologies. Just because something failed back then does not mean that iterating on 
that idea (RAD) is bound to failure again. As a community of developers we should always 
be pushing ahead with technologies to make our lives easier. Sometimes those technologies 
work and sometimes they don't. As long as we learn from the mistakes and keep forging 
ahead is what matters.
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/unknown_133991

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Nobody learns from the mistakes. They just hear "faster application development" and follow all the other leemings off the cliff.

Faster, Better, Cheaper - pick any two.

RAD didn't just fail "back then." RAD has failed EACH AND EVER TIME it has been re-introduced. The latest excuse for hacking on the fly without a plan is AGILE. The latest "tool" for it is QML.

Making horribly bad choices appears to be genetically fundamental to management.
Don't believe me?

Read up on INTEL's SEGMENT:OFFSET memory addressing in the original x86 chips. Fine fine decision there, despite all of the other chips on the market which didn't do it because it was a stupid idea.

After IBM made a poor decision choosing x86, they made an idiotic decision to reserve the 384K above 640K for add-in cards/adapters rather than just skipping the first 384K at boot. Adding this insult to the injury of SEGMENT:OFFSET forced us to have C/C++ compilers which utilized Compact/Small/Medium/Large memory models. Linking object modules compiled under different memory models was a catastrophe not all compilers stopped.

Read up on all of the different DOS memory extenders
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS_extender

If you are too young to have used them, also read up on overlay linkers trying to page stuff in and out.
https://www.pcorner.com/list/DBASE/BLIDEM.ZIP/BLINKER.DOC/

The fault with RAD, the fault with AGILE and even the fault with X-treme programming along with every other term for that throughout the decade, is that they are all marketing fraud for hacking on the fly. The RAD type tool sets attempt to bring non-programmers into the programming universe to force down labor costs. This also forces down the quality of delivered systems.

For any tiny system which doesn't really matter, one where a single person really can see each and every aspect of it in their head ALL AT ONCE, you can hack on the fly. The real trouble is, nobody is willing to admit just how small a system that really is. That's why I get multiple phone calls and emails each day from pimps pitching contracts to come in and salvage a project which was QML and AGILE and now in an absolute destitute state. They've no learned the hard way a 50% solution can't be stretched to 100%

Guess what? They'll try the exact same thing on the next project.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.



--
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
http://www.logikalblog.com
http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog
http://lesedi.us/
http://onedollarcontentstore.com

_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest

Reply via email to