On terça-feira, 27 de março de 2012 15.44.06, Rui Maciel wrote:
> On 03/27/2012 02:51 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> > I will include tohttp://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good what is not
> > already there.
>
> I've noticed that the article includes the following sentence:
>
>
> All the source code of the Q
On 3/27/2012 9:15 AM, Jason H wrote:
> Well my money is on Elop (Flop as I call him) reversing course and going to
> Mer, or something of the sort. There is still some fight in him. Nokia Lumina
> devices will be priced at $99 here in the US, which might get the low-end
> market. But the N9 is s
you compile an Qt-app god saves a kitten from certain
death.
- Original Message -
From: Harri Pasanen
To: interest@qt-project.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Interest] Qt is good because...
On 03/27/2012 04:12 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> The wiki page a
On 03/27/2012 04:12 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> The wiki page also says that the API has "the best API available, not
> only in C++ but also compared to other languages." I'm a bit reluctant
> typing "best of" anything unless we have some proof e.g. comparing
> with Objective-C for iOS, Java for Andr
On 03/27/2012 02:51 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> I will include tohttp://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good what is not
> already there.
I've noticed that the article includes the following sentence:
All the source code of the Qt libraries is open source and well written
with good API references.
I w
On terça-feira, 27 de março de 2012 07.12.35, Quim Gil wrote:
> I'm a bit reluctant typing "best of" anything unless we have some proof
> e.g. comparing with Objective-C for iOS, Java for Android and
> XNA/Silverlight for Windows Phone. Many of the developers that ask
> themselves whether to use Qt
I think is good because for old-fashioned guys like me, working on
very-big applications ( not intended to run in an embedded / mobile/...
environment ) Qt is capable to scale easily to even any size.
As a sample : about 3M lines of code, multi-Db / multi-O.S capable app
( Win/*IX/Mac) running wit
On 03/26/2012 10:58 PM, ext Andre Somers wrote:
> * The documentation is clearly best-of-breed,
The wiki page also says that the API has "the best API available, not
only in C++ but also compared to other languages."
I'm a bit reluctant typing "best of" anything unless we have some proof
e.g. c
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> Is there more to say comparing Qt directly to the very own offerings of
> iOS, Android and Windows Phone? Language, APIs, SDK, documentation...?
There's no comparison. I'm sitting in an mostly Android development
shop, and people just amazed at N
Thank you for all the feedback!
I will include to http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good what is not
already there.
Please let's not get stuck in the C++ vs JS/QML discussion. Qt has both
strengths and we should explain pros and cons to each developer profile.
Is there more to say comparing Qt
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Harri Pasanen wrote:
> Personally for me C & C++ support are essential, as those provide access
> to a wealth of ready to use libraries, like libav, opencv, etc.
> They also provide the required speed improvement when starting to polish
> feature complete applicati
On 03/26/2012 11:24 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> Hi,
>
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good
>
> Please help creating a list of points explaining why Qt is good compared
> to other alternatives for application developers.
>
> Let’s focus on specifics: contrastable proof points and experiences from
> dev
On 03/27/2012 12:02 PM, Sivan Greenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Quim Gil wrote:
>>> - C++
>> Please help explaining this further (as I'm not a C++ developer myself).
>> Also we need to explain this next to QML, Javascript and HTML5 -
>> otherwise we risk keeping the percepti
On 03/27/2012 11:02 AM, Sivan Greenberg wrote:
>>> >> - signals&slots (aka observer pattern)
>> >
>> > Help explaining the beauty of this functionality compared to other
>> > toolkits is appreciated. Again, how to explain how great this is to a
>> > newcomer?
>> >
> Personally speaking, I n
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Quim Gil wrote:
>
>> - C++
>
> Please help explaining this further (as I'm not a C++ developer myself).
> Also we need to explain this next to QML, Javascript and HTML5 -
> otherwise we risk keeping the perception that Qt is C++ only and scaring
> away many mobile
On 03/27/2012 06:58 AM, Andre Somers wrote:
> The two main points are for me:
> * The documentation is clearly best-of-breed, and
I agree. I forgot to mention this, but maybe the single main reason
that makes Qt easy to work with is Qt's notorious investment in
documentation.
Rui Maciel
_
I'd like to second André's points. I initially started programming
gtkmm and sigc++ a few years ago. When I switched to Qt, my life
suddenly became so much easier with the best documentation and clear
and consistent API. I can now quickly develop applications and, as Bo
said, the toolkit gets out o
Op 26-3-2012 23:24, Quim Gil schreef:
> Hi,
>
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good
>
> Please help creating a list of points explaining why Qt is good compared
> to other alternatives for application developers.
>
> Let’s focus on specifics: contrastable proof points and experiences from
> devel
Hi Quim,
I have one thing that I tell customers when they ask me the why Qt
question: It's the framework that gets the least in my way.
Most experienced engineers realize that this is *exactly* what you hope
to achieve. It's impossible to do any better because everything has
drawbacks and suck
On 03/26/2012 11:09 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> Thank you for the fast edits and replies, here and at
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good&;
> http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/15808/
>
> Some questions to dig deeper. Note that these arguments should be
> convincing for developers currently fami
I think the lighthouse portion would be a really good point to list for
porters.
As far as comparison, Qt is far better at advanced gui stuff like dock
widgets and floating toolbars than wxwidgets. This may have changed since
then but compared to wx2.6/2.8 I found Qt to be superior in that aspect.
Thank you for the fast edits and replies, here and at
http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good &
http://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/15808/
Some questions to dig deeper. Note that these arguments should be
convincing for developers currently familiar with other platforms
(mainly mobile, if yo
On 03/26/2012 10:24 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> Please help creating a list of points explaining why Qt is good compared
> to other alternatives for application developers.
>
> Let’s focus on specifics: contrastable proof points and experiences from
> developers working in different platforms are greatly
Hi,
http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-is-Good
Please help creating a list of points explaining why Qt is good compared
to other alternatives for application developers.
Let’s focus on specifics: contrastable proof points and experiences from
developers working in different platforms are greatly ap
24 matches
Mail list logo
