As some recommands to me to build my own version of Qt, I give it a try. Sadly I am not able to build Qt 5.8 alpha nor the branch 5.8 from git. I switched to the branch 5.7 that seems to compile correctly (still running).
That exactly why I think that it would be great if binaries of alpha and beta were released in the Qt Maintenance Tool. 2016-09-21 14:51 GMT+02:00 Jason H <jh...@gmx.com>: > This gets at what I don't like about Qt the most: As a user I have no > control of where it goes. I can (and do) file bugs and feature > suggestions... How they get prioritized, I have no control over. Sometimes > it's months, sometimes it's multiple years later, very often it's never (or > more correctly, still not implemented yet). This is despite being a paying > customer. Once the issue is entered, it might get tagged with the support > contract level I am on, but it's effectively out of my hands. > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 8:35 AM > > From: "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru> > > To: "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com>, "Jason H" > <jh...@gmx.com> > > Cc: interest <interest@qt-project.org>, "Rob Allan" < > rob_al...@trimble.com> > > Subject: Re: [Interest] What don't you like about Qt? > > > > > > > > 21.09.2016, 15:28, "Jean-Michaël Celerier" <jeanmichael.celerier@gmail. > com>: > > > Hey, there is a lot of interesting points in all these answers; some > similars, some not. > > > > > > Maybe a good way forward would be to try to pinpoint the problems more > precisely with an online platform such > > > as http://en.arguman.org/ ? Or even just some kind of google doc... > > > > I think wiki page would be a better alternative. > > > > > > > > Starting from there would maybe make it easier for the Qt devs to > weigh the "for" and "against" for the stuff that is often mentioned ? > > > > I doubt anyone here is going to weigh anything besides patches submitted > to review. > > > > > Instead of having to find specific arguments in 45 mails... And then > open some paths for contributions to try to alleviate the problems. > > > > > > My 0.0005 cents > > > > > > Best > > > Jean-Michaël > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Jason H <jh...@gmx.com> wrote: > > >>> I also can't help making a comparison with two other popular layout > > >>> frameworks: WPF/XAML, and Android/AXML. In both of these worlds, the > markup > > >>> language and the "code-behind" class hierarchy of UI elements are > > >>> absolutely equivalent 1st class citizens. Anything you can do in > XAML, you > > >>> can also do in the C# code-behind, whether it be creating controls, > > >>> changing their properties, altering layouts, etc. Likewise in > Android/AXML, > > >>> I can (if I choose) create FrameLayouts, RelativeLayouts, TextViews, > etc in > > >>> code, and arrange them and manipulate them any way I like, as an > > >>> alternative to creating an AXML designer layout. > > >>> > > >>> It seems unfortunate that Qt Quick doesn't take this approach, and > that the > > >>> "code-behind" experience is so limited. One reason that I've heard > why it > > >>> might have been done this way is that a rich and fully public C++ > interface > > >>> may have hamstrung the developers too much, as there would be > constant > > >>> breaking changes from one release to the next. If that's true then I > guess > > >>> I understand that, but I would still rather put up with a rich C++ > > >>> interface that had breaking changes at new releases, than the > relative > > >>> limited C++ interface we have now. > > >> > > >> I'm not sure I follow. Declarituce UI is in. QML, React (+JSX) give > you decaritive layouts. It convergent evolution of stucture±properties+code > > >> > > >> XAML, WPF, Qt Widgets all have structure and properties but no code. > You've got to create the objects then in another context, assign code to > them. > > >> > > >> If you are taking about how QQuickItems wrap C++ my understanding is > that's because of the scene graph. My perspective is that the C++ side is > better before I'm always having to drop from QML to C++ to expose stuff for > QML. So I really don't understand your issue? > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Interest mailing list > > >> Interest@qt-project.org > > >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > , > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Interest mailing list > > > Interest@qt-project.org > > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Konstantin > > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > -- Xavier
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest