3 ms·

.... where do you see imperative registration, layout inflating and MVC in my example ?

• mlsarecmg 9y ago
  It just doesn't look comparable to the example i've posted. They were really, really simple, so if QT is the same, i would love to see it do the same. As for imperative registration, didn't you just link me to it? If they were functions, you could do: const A = () => <div>...</div> const B = () => <h1><A /></h1> Notice that the B component can refer to the A component because it's in the same scope. There's no magic and no binding/loading. A is a function that is called inside B's function body. It also isn't done by inference of an ID (which would be registration).
  • jcelerier 9y ago
    > const A = () => <div>...</div> ; const B = () => <h1><A /></h1> Yes, an equivalent in QML would look like this if you want it in a single file: Component { id: a Text { text: "foo" } } Component { id: b Rectangle { Loader { sourceComponent: a } } } but the language really wants you to have one component per file, so : A.qml: Text { text: "foo" } B.qml Rectangle { A { } } > if QT is the same, It's not. QML is at its core not a functional language, it's a declarative & reactive language. In my experience, at least 30-40% of QML code does not need any functions. > There's no magic and no binding/loading. I'm not sure we are using the same meaning of binding. The "A" token in your example is obviously bound to the "A" variable declared before. > It also isn't done by inference of an ID (which would be registration). ids in QML are just the variable names. eg Rectangle { A { id: foo } width: 2 * foo.width }