On segunda-feira, 11 de março de 2013 23.02.02, André Pönitz wrote: > Why shouldn't it be possible to have a clearly layered stack with > proper interfaces?
Maybe "possible" is not the right point. The point is whether it is feasible with the time and manpower available. Defining a proper interface takes time. Not defining it saves time, therefore allows us to finish the higher-level API sooner. > > But it's possibly even easier to write a single > > Qt Quick-based solution, with no C++ API. > > Given the lack of manpower, that's an alternative to consider. > > I am not sure I understand what this alternative would consist of. A QML-only API. > A solution that pushes common activities that can be done at compile > time to every user's run time is not an approach that scales well > outside the "Mobile App" comfort zone the current incarnation of Qt > Quick is addressing. It does not scale down to "real" embedded, and > it does not scale up to the usual bunch of engineering applications > Qt was serving well in the past. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
