Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
Don Wrote:
John Reimer wrote:
Hello Eldar,
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Eldar Insafutdinov
<e.insafutdi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Denis Koroskin Wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:59:28 +0300, Eldar Insafutdinov
<e.insafutdi...@gmail.com> wrote:
ideage Wrote:
Great stuff!
Expect window's version!
So after some time trying to build qtd windows packages I realized
that there are huge issues. I tried first dmd and since I have to
link D part of wrapper with C++ object files produced by mingw -
it didnt work and I was told that it's because mingw and dmd have
different object file formats. So 2 options left are gdc(which is
kinda outdated) and ldc(which doesn't support exception handling).
So the situation is suspended, although I am trying to build it
with ldc now.
You can try building Qt with DMC. It works quite will in pair with
DMD on Windows.
And will dmc be able to compile Qt? And also as much as I undestdood
make is not compatible with the one that comes with dmc? I will
probably run into a big problem..
You could use mingw's GNU make with CC=dmc. But I dunno if dmc will
compile Qt or not. I would think it would, though.
--bb
Actually I decided to make a dll. It is possible to do it and will be
more robust solution. Qt is not tested to be compiled with dmc by
trolltech(mingw, msvc and icc are guaranteed).
A dll is probably your best option, if you can make it work with the C++
code(?). I would have thought you needed a C interface, though.
dmc is rarely supported by the majority of open-source projects out
there, so you end up having to fix a lot of makefiles and a lot of
code. It is especially difficult getting C++ code working with such
projects because many of these will use macro definitions to
enable/disable certain vendor compiler features. Also you will run into
C++ implementation differences that make dmc choke.
On several occasions where I've tried to use dmc for the same reason,
and I've come to the conclusion that dmc support is a whole project in
itself. It's a huge waste of time if all you want is to interface with a
library. I recommend the ddl route if you can make it work. Most others
have done the same.
Incindentally, if you are curious why projects like Derelict and other
bindings (using dynamic loading) are so oft used in the D community,
this is pretty much the reason.
-JJR
Well, since Qt is going to use the lunatic# LGPL license, you have to
use a DLL anyway for commercial use.
# lunatic because of the prohibition against static linking. I cannot
understand why anyone would use such an absolutely moronic license.
I'm thinking on putting only C++ part of binding to a dll, while statically
link D part. With Qt 4.5 out under lgpl we can make QtD under BSD, so this will
work.
Cool!
