I really hope the original point of the thread is not lost in the 53rd boring repeat of this argument. PLEASE test COMPONENT_TREE on macOS, I don't want to have to fix it myself if it's slow again.
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 07:44:19PM +0000, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > On 12/4/2017 1:47 PM, jp charras wrote: > > Le 04/12/2017 à 18:53, Tomasz Wlostowski a écrit : > >> On 04/12/17 18:48, Chris Pavlina wrote: > >>> Hey, just a comment because I see people are wrestling with > >>> COMPONENT_TREE performance as I did when writing it. TEST ON MACOS. The > >>> performance of the widget there has a really different profile from on > >>> other systems. I had to do things in really unobvious ways to make it > >>> perform reasonably there. > >>> > >> > >> I've noticed spending more and more time fixing wxWidgets bugs instead > >> of Kicad bugs. Maybe we should have a serious look at Qt or Electron > >> (Webkit/JS-based UI) as a possible future alternative for wx... > >> > >> Tom (fighting with wxWidgets thread safety under Windows...) > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > I did not use QT when starting Kicad mainly because it was not free on > > Windows (only on Linux). > > > > But, please, keep in mind the main reason you are not fighting with QT is > > the fact we are not using QT. > > > > I remember coworkers who spent a lot of time to convert their work from QT3 > > to QT4 ... > > And QT4 is not the latest version. > > This is an issue we never have with wxWidgets. > > > > When someone say me: you are using this tool, but this other tool has not > > these issues, well: > > - Of course this other tool has not these issues. > > - but this other tool has other issues. > > > > So, before spending my time on QT, I want a *proof* we will have really > > less issues. > > I do not want just change the list of issues. > > And until now, I never see this proof. > > > > I wondered when this subject would rear it's ugly head again. Every > couple of years we dig this horse up and beat it to death again. It's > getting rather comical. Like JP, I would like to see some proof of all > the wonderful things QT can do for us that wx cannot. It has been a > long time since I've done anything with QT so maybe my information is > dated but I don't remember QT being all that. I just remember trading > one set of issues for another. I've used several UI toolkits over the > years and they all have pros and cons. I'm not opposed to using any > toolkit. I am opposed to doing it for someone's personal preference for > one toolkit over another. The question remains, would the effort to > port to another toolkit be worth it? I have seen no objective evidence > to support the assumption that switching to QT or any other toolkit will > make life better for KiCad developers and until I do, I see no reason to > kick wx to the curb. What I do know is that the effort will be massive > and basically bring new feature development to a halt for a significant > period of time. > > Cheers, > > Wayne > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp