Slashdot Mirror
Qt vs MFC
Philippe Fremy writes: "I have just published and translated into English a comparison between Qt programming and MFC programming, which was written by Pascal Audoux (a fellow coworker). I am interested in feedback and would love to add quotes from developers that have used both toolkits." Here is the English version ("Qt vs MFC") as well as the French one ("Qt contre MFC").
> These are well-known design flaws with both approaches, relating to efficiency, thread safety, etc.
In 3 years of development with Qt, I haven't met any of the problems you describe. Maybe I am not writing the right programs.
> If they wanted an improvement, they should have provided an immutable string class with a suitable set of operations,
You mean a QConstString
> Oh, and being in native Unicode isn't particularly clever.
This is a comparison with MFC. You are telling me that their choice is really stupid and I agree. In comparison, the other choice looks clever.
> As for the graphics, sometimes I want to lay out my dialog controls in exactly the positions
You can do it if you want, even with Qt Designer. But I don't see when you want to do that. Could you give an example ?
Anyway, in the big majority of case, you want things to layout automatically and it is easy to do that with Qt.
> ensuring that your UI can cope with reordered sentences
QString can deal with reordered arguments.
> A simple tr() function is not the silver bullet here, contrary to what the article seems to suggest.
Yes it is. gettext() had it right from years. This approach allow the developer not to worry too much about translation, allow the translator not to cope with compiling stuff and get automatic update, and allow the user to add new language without hassle and to switch easily from one language to another.
Qt uses exactly the gettext() approach, with their own tools.