4 ms·

I don't know who would willingly pick Qt to do anything. It's a massive pain in the ass to use, the licensing is expensive and convoluted, and it codes like you

I don't know who would willingly pick Qt to do anything. It's a massive pain in the ass to use, the licensing is expensive and convoluted, and it codes like you're 20 years behind. The IDE is junk, the tooling is garbage, the slightest version shift breaks compatibility, the library conflicts with same names of objects, etc... Qt is my new practical joke for engineers complaining about how bad they have it in their current stack. Linux really needs a better UI framework because all other platforms are better and faster to implement in native languages/apis.

Kelteseth 6y ago
> It's a massive pain in the ass to use I use it every day. No more pain than any other UI framework > the licensing is expensive Use LGPL if your platform allows it > convoluted Yes. The Qt company wants you to pay for their commercial license. > and it codes like you're 20 years behind With QWidgets yes. QML is the reason I would not want to start a new app in JS/Electron > The IDE is junk QtCreator is easily the best c++ in town. > The slightest version shift breaks compatibility Never had any problem the last 4 years with my projects upgrading from 5.8 -> 5.15 [1] https://gitlab.com/kelteseth/ScreenPlay https://gitlab.com/kelteseth/ScreenPlay
- pjmlp 6y ago
  > QtCreator is easily the best c++ in town. Actually I would assert that belongs to C++ Builder, with its RAD tooling.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - dkersten 6y ago
    C++ Builder costs €1500 for the first year though and the community edition limits you to no more than €5k revenue, while Qt Creator is completely free and open source. So I don’t really see them in the same category, personally.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      The point is what the tooling is capable of, price not being a factor. Luckily there are places where employers still see a value paying for tooling.

Kelteseth 6y ago

> It's a massive pain in the ass to use I use it every day. No more pain than any other UI framework > the licensing is expensive Use LGPL if your platform allows it > convoluted Yes. The Qt company wants you to pay for their commercial license. > and it codes like you're 20 years behind With QWidgets yes. QML is the reason I would not want to start a new app in JS/Electron > The IDE is junk QtCreator is easily the best c++ in town. > The slightest version shift breaks compatibility Never had any problem the last 4 years with my projects upgrading from 5.8 -> 5.15 [1] https://gitlab.com/kelteseth/ScreenPlay https://gitlab.com/kelteseth/ScreenPlay

pjmlp 6y ago
> QtCreator is easily the best c++ in town. Actually I would assert that belongs to C++ Builder, with its RAD tooling.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dkersten 6y ago
  C++ Builder costs €1500 for the first year though and the community edition limits you to no more than €5k revenue, while Qt Creator is completely free and open source. So I don’t really see them in the same category, personally.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    The point is what the tooling is capable of, price not being a factor. Luckily there are places where employers still see a value paying for tooling.