4 ms·
C++ Qt, I've found, is an entire separate beast. It goes out of its way to not rely on the STL, so that std::string and QString are separate, non-convertible c
by freeone3000 10y ago
C++ Qt, I've found, is an entire separate beast.
It goes out of its way to not rely on the STL, so that std::string and QString are separate, non-convertible classes. QList and std::list<> are the same, same for QMap and so on and so forth. So data communication is already a pain.
We then have further issues with function invocation. Slots and sockets are simple with python, because functions are first-class in python. In C++, they are very much not, so slot-socket binding looks like:
connect(sender, SIGNAL (valueChanged(QString,QString)),
receiver, SLOT (updateValue(QString)) );
This is less than ideal.
- pjmlp 10y agoWhen having to deal with compilers that barely support a mix of C++98 and C++03, Qt is quite good. STL wasn't always here and still isn't in some embedded platforms.