5 ms·

Is it just me, or is there some overlap and possibly short-lived components one shouldn't invest time in (ala Silverlight and XAML)? I don't know why there's QM

by cm3 10y ago

Is it just me, or is there some overlap and possibly short-lived components one shouldn't invest time in (ala Silverlight and XAML)? I don't know why there's QML and QtQuick.

distances 10y ago
QML is perhaps the best current option for cross-platform desktop application creation and for embedded devices with custom UI. For mobile apps it's debatable if QML makes as much sense.
- lultimouomo 10y ago
  Can you tell me why do you feel QML is superior to Qt Widgets for desktop applications? I tried QtQuick 1 and was underwhelmed (so much glue code to link C++ and QML; the awkwardness of JS without the huge amount of libraries that save your day in web development). In the last couple of years I have seen a lot of renewed hype about QML but I keep wondering what it's buying you over the traditional widgets in non-embedded envs (where you might want to profit from OpenGL acceleration for performance reasons). Am I missing something? I would love to love QML, as I love Qt and I see that widgets are clearly on their way out...
  - distances 10y ago
    My experience is indeed more on the embedded and mobile side of things, where hardware acceleration and animations are indeed a major selling point. I'd let others with more experience on desktop QML vs. widgets to judge their respective strengths, my comment was more about Qt vs. non-Qt frameworks. That makes QML the topic as it's currently the main UI development story for Qt.
  - mlvljr 10y ago
    1) Ease of complete control over visuals and behavior of the "items" and 2) the automated reevaluation of (functional, let's name things what they are) "bindings" of arbitrary structure -- are the main selling points, I'd say (C++ interop will be not a burden, if business logic stays in the backend, making the interop logic rather compact).
- rossy 10y ago
  Are you sure? I'm building a cross platform desktop application at the moment. I briefly considered QML, but decided against it because I care about high-DPI support and native look & feel on Windows, and it seems like Qt Quick Controls 1 doesn't provide the former and Qt Quick Controls 2 doesn't provide the latter. Because of this, I'm a bit disappointed that Qt 5.8 alpha doesn't have anything interesting for Qt Widgets users. Qt Widgets is the best cross-platform UI framework out there, but Qt Quick is, at least from my perspective, a bit mediocre.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    I don't have much experience with Qt, although I had done a few toy applications since the early KDE 2.0 days with it. The last attempt was a small mobile app for Android/WP that I ended up rewriting in Java,C++/CX + C++11, because of the issues I had with Qt 5.4. However I still follow the announcements and get the feeling that they are trying to re-purpose Qt in the same way that JavaFX, WPF/XAML and mobile OS UI stacks have done, but it is still catching up with their feature sets.

by cm3 10y ago

Is it just me, or is there some overlap and possibly short-lived components one shouldn't invest time in (ala Silverlight and XAML)? I don't know why there's QML and QtQuick.

distances 10y ago

QML is perhaps the best current option for cross-platform desktop application creation and for embedded devices with custom UI. For mobile apps it's debatable if QML makes as much sense.

lultimouomo 10y ago
Can you tell me why do you feel QML is superior to Qt Widgets for desktop applications? I tried QtQuick 1 and was underwhelmed (so much glue code to link C++ and QML; the awkwardness of JS without the huge amount of libraries that save your day in web development). In the last couple of years I have seen a lot of renewed hype about QML but I keep wondering what it's buying you over the traditional widgets in non-embedded envs (where you might want to profit from OpenGL acceleration for performance reasons). Am I missing something? I would love to love QML, as I love Qt and I see that widgets are clearly on their way out...
- distances 10y ago
  My experience is indeed more on the embedded and mobile side of things, where hardware acceleration and animations are indeed a major selling point. I'd let others with more experience on desktop QML vs. widgets to judge their respective strengths, my comment was more about Qt vs. non-Qt frameworks. That makes QML the topic as it's currently the main UI development story for Qt.
- mlvljr 10y ago
  1) Ease of complete control over visuals and behavior of the "items" and 2) the automated reevaluation of (functional, let's name things what they are) "bindings" of arbitrary structure -- are the main selling points, I'd say (C++ interop will be not a burden, if business logic stays in the backend, making the interop logic rather compact).
rossy 10y ago
Are you sure? I'm building a cross platform desktop application at the moment. I briefly considered QML, but decided against it because I care about high-DPI support and native look & feel on Windows, and it seems like Qt Quick Controls 1 doesn't provide the former and Qt Quick Controls 2 doesn't provide the latter. Because of this, I'm a bit disappointed that Qt 5.8 alpha doesn't have anything interesting for Qt Widgets users. Qt Widgets is the best cross-platform UI framework out there, but Qt Quick is, at least from my perspective, a bit mediocre.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  I don't have much experience with Qt, although I had done a few toy applications since the early KDE 2.0 days with it. The last attempt was a small mobile app for Android/WP that I ended up rewriting in Java,C++/CX + C++11, because of the issues I had with Qt 5.4. However I still follow the announcements and get the feeling that they are trying to re-purpose Qt in the same way that JavaFX, WPF/XAML and mobile OS UI stacks have done, but it is still catching up with their feature sets.