3 ms·
Qt is not even standard C++ . I can't understand how people are double standard'ed and double dealing with problems . just look at what is done by Qt in C++ (wh
by 0xFFC 12y ago
Qt is not even standard C++ . I can't understand how people are double standard'ed and double dealing with problems . just look at what is done by Qt in C++ (whole non-standard Moc's) I am sure if it was from Microsoft (even open source product) whole Internet blaming Microsoft "wtf is this" & "Microsoft every time should disobey standards" and "Microsoft is just crap". how is this work? when we (as open source community) doing something this is good , but If Microsoft done something exactly like this then Microsoft is evil.
- abdulhaq 12y agoSorry but that's an old, tired argument that only occasionally gets aired these days. Running a pre-processor as part of the build process does not mean that Qt is not standard C++. Also, if you knew anything about the history of Microsoft you'd know they deserve all the stick they get for their abuse of standards - 'embrace and extend' was their philosophy, it sounds innocuous but the effects weren't.
- 0xFFC 12y agoAnother thing I forget to tell , Imagine one day whole linux desktop ported to Qt , what about C programmer ? what is Qt's answer for C programmer ? (please don't start C vs C++ , it is personal and technical choice , somebody like me prefer C's simple approach , somebody maybe like you prefer all OOP/C++ approach)
- laumars 12y agoYou could probably write linkable libraries to wrap around Qt's C++ bindings - much like how other programming languages do things.
- slavik81 12y agoThey use a code generator to implement reflection methods on classes marked with the Q_OBJECT macro. The output of that code generator is standard, readable C++. It was, and still is, a very useful, practical way of doing things. I can't say as to what Microsoft has done or not done, but I don't see anything immoral about the moc.