Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

QT 3.2 Released

Posted by timothy on from the cutie dept.

GlennZ writes "Today, Trolltech has released version 3.2 of QT. This release includes a completely rewritten, faster font-rendering engine and a lot more. Go download it today!"

11 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Mac version by Ranger+Rick · · Score: 5, Informative

    yes it is... it's on the FTP site (qt-mac-free-3.2.0.sit)

    --

    WWJD? JWRTFM!!!

  2. Splash Screen by Per+Wigren · · Score: 3, Insightful

    * QSplashScreen (add splash screens to applications)

    I really hope that one will be able to disable this by a standard Qt-argument (--no-splash) or by a env-variable because I'm afraid this will be abused.. :P

    --
    My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    1. Re:Splash Screen by Arandir · · Score: 3, Informative

      The QSplash class is trivial. So trivial I wrote my own in an hour that turned out to 95% identical to Qt's before I knew that they were going to have one. It simply puts a pixmap widget on the screen, starts a timer, and waits for either a timeout or a mouseclick.

      QSplash is not going to check the command line arguments. This is an instance where it is the programmer's job to determine if the user wants a splash screen or not. But don't worry too much, every instance of a splash screen in a Qt application I have ever seen (Kdevelop, Quanta, etc) allows you to turn it off. Using QSplash instead of a homegrown splash isn't going to change this.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    2. Re:Splash Screen by cyb97 · · Score: 3, Informative
      It's probably gonna make more developers create splash screens as it's timesaving... While it's a waste spending about an hour programming a splash-class if your program lacks in other divisions; spending 5-6 minutes implementing this new class is more appropriate...
      If lack of time is the reason it's implemented in the first place, I guess implementing a --no-splash is probably not in the .plan for some future ;-)

      But I can't really see how more choice can be worse...

    3. Re:Splash Screen by Arandir · · Score: 3, Informative

      I guess implementing a --no-splash is probably not in the .plan for some future

      Well, it's also goes against the Way of Doing Things. Standard Qt command line options should not modify the behavior of the software. So the command line options you see are stuff like fonts, colormaps and the like. You don't see stuff like "--cancel-button-left" because that's not Qt's job, it's the developer's.

      KDE is another story, because part of the purpose of KDE is to provide a unifrom look and feel for the desktop. I can easily imagine a KSplash class that checks for a --no-splash option.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  3. I don't understand... by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 4, Funny

    Isn't Quicktime 4 already out? And who's Trolltech? I thought Apple made Quicktime...

  4. Re:$1550 just to use it? No thanks. by computerme · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'll bite too.

    Why is there a free GPL version on their site for the Mac and Linux? The windows version was ceased cause too many (not naming names here) people refused to follow the rules of license.

    QT Rocks!*

    *Except for those that think "time != money" and "it !not take money to make money."

  5. Re:hogwash. by Kidbro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    when you have *free* alternatives ... utterly *free*, suddenly that $1500 is a whole lot of money.

    But you don't.
    Seriously, what alternatives to QT do you suggest? If you need something with a configurable look, looks sort of like native Windows apps on Windows, is supported on Linux, OS X, Windows and Solaris, and is fairly mature and stable.

    --
    May we live long and die out
  6. Re:font rednering by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Informative
    FreeType is cross platform though ;)

    FreeType however does not do the relevant layout you need for all international scripts. GTK uses Pango for this purpose, TrollTech rolled their own. FreeType is just involved with rendering the glyphs, there is quite a bit more involved to completely display unicode text.

  7. Re:$1550 just to use it? No thanks. by Keith+Russell · · Score: 4, Informative
    $1550? That's nothing. Chump change.

    The problem is not that QT/Win is not free-as-in-beer. The problem is that QT/Win is not Free-as-in-speech.

    Trolltech released a Non-Commercial edition of QT/Win 2.3. The license basically said you couldn't make one thin dime off anything built with the Non-Comm edition, and since it was incompatible with the GPL, you had to add an exception to your license. Nobody took that license seriously, and Commercial license sales dropped. Trolltech was forced to end the line after that one release. (IMHO, had they gone GPL in the first place, they wouldn't have had that problem. The GPL gets respect.)

    Not that you could find that out from their FAQs. You have to go digging through the QT-Interest mailing list archives. All the FAQ has is flippant sayings like "When Windows is completely Open Source...". Bah. Like Microsoft really cares about Trolltech. Windows-based developers are the only ones getting screwed.

    In the end, Trolltech decided that "Windows compatible" and "Free/Open Source" are mutually exclusive. (Pay no attention to the cross-platform Open Source projects behind the curtain.)

    But I'm not bitter.

    --
    This sig intentionally left blank.
  8. Why moc? by dalleboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When are they dumping the Meta Object Compiler (moc) and switch over to Boost.Signals?