"BLS" <windev...@hotmail.de> wrote in message news:gkodf2$1ah...@digitalmars.com... > Bill Baxter wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 4:42 AM, naryl <c...@ngs.ru> wrote: >>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:40:19 +0300, Bill Baxter <wbax...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Qt 4.5 to be LGPL >>>> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09%2F01%2F14%2F1312210 >>>> >>>> Now we just need a D port... >>>> >>>> --bb >>> There is a binding currently in development. >>> http://code.google.com/p/qtd/ >> >> Excellent. I didn't know anyone was working on it. Qt is simply the >> best damn GUI toolkit there is. But I wouldn't touch it with a meter >> long chopstick when it was GPL. >> >> I guess the D port is going to have MOC too? >> >> --bb > > I am just curious: Why QT is such a damned cool toolkit ? > In other words, how is it better than wxWidgets ? > > I've never used QT but QT is IMO more comparable to SWING in that it > mimics native controls/widgets...so semi-optimal. > ...and what the heck is MOC ? > Bjoern >
>From what I gather from having recently been trying to read up on Qt: - The newer verions of Qt actually use the real native widgets, unlike older versions of Qt. - MOC is a preprocessor packaged with Qt. Qt uses this concept of "signals" and "sockets", which are apperently just like using a delegate collection (ie, like "(void delegate())[]" or C#/WinForm's event system, or something like that). Problem is, the original version of Qt is made for C++, which doesn't have proper delegates (at least not last I checked). So they hacked it together using a special preprocessor for C++ code.