Slashdot Mirror
Trolltech Releases First Qt 4 Technology Preview
An anonymous reader writes "Trolltech has announced the availability of the first Qt 4 Technical Preview. Qt 4, the next major release of the popular cross-platform C++ application framework which KDE is based on, is scheduled for final release in late Q1, 2005. Download mirrors here, here and here."
I just wish I could use it when developing cross-platform GPL-programs. :(
My other account has a 3-digit UID.
Qt has always been techically superior and rather geek-friendly. Looks like in the new release they have found PHB-friendly names for their existing components. For example, they call the QTL (Qt Template Library - their replacement for STL) "Tulip".
Seems like they have changed more classes than they usually do, and have moved a whole set of "obsolete" classes into a separate compatibility library to help the transition from Qt3 to Qt4. This probably means that developers have a few years to remove these classes from their codebase before they go from "deprecated" to "completely removed".
The press release seems to be quiet about their previous challenge to Java (they have claimed a few months ago to produce a Qt4 that will be in "direct competition" to Sun's offerings). I'm kind of happy about this.
According to the article, they implementing some nice big changes, like a new paint framework, and unicode renderer, etc.
But by Q1 of 2005?
How long after that will we need to wait until KDE switches over? (assuming that QT4 will be a step up from QT3)
KDE team?
Error 407 - No creative sig found
Does Qt still use that layer of C++ compiler workaround cruft?
I never understood why they went and wrote their framework in a language that had such sucky implementations. I think GTK had it right - develop it in a language that works, then provide (de-uglified) bindings for other languages. gtkmm is a very clean API, IMO.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
so...
this would be a great thing to have and cross platform would be a killer feature
IMHO
regards
John Jones
Firstly, under a commercial license (which is ~$1000)
Secondly, under the GPL for non-commercial usage only
However, QT for Windows is not released under the second license, meaning that if you want to develop with QT and the Windows platform - even if you are a non-commercial entity - you must purchase a commercial license (or manage to persuade the nice folk at TT to grant you a license, as a few open source projects have managed to do).
I feel this limits the target market... as one of the reasons to even begin coding in QT (other than the WONDERFUL documentation :p), is the promise of cross platform availibility. I have heard it is possible to compile under win32 platform with cygwin and mingw - but I cannot confirm this
Anyway, as I develop primarily for *nix platforms, this is not a big issue for me, but I would like to see QT opened up for the windows platform. That way I'm not limited in the future if I decide to work with another platform.
I've been using wxWidgets for quite a while. I must admit that it took a little getting used to, but I don't think the parent post does wx justice. Sure wx isn't as mature as Qt, but it is Open Source (which /. ers should like), it can be used in commercial apps (which people that like selling software should like), and the guys working on it put in a ton of time making a great library. The differences between wx 2.4.2 and 2.5.2 are quite impressive, and their current MacOS guy seems to be making an effort to bring wxMac along by leaps and bounds.
Resizing isn't as tough as you think, look into wxSizer objects. If you want a more robust basic tree control, take a look at wxTreeMultiCtrl, or sub-class wxTreeCtrl and make your own. It's the beauty of the system. I've used tree controls in several applications without such pains.
It's always a bit of a trip learning a new GUI toolkit, but the sheer volume of great tools included in wxWidgets overshadows any pitfalls found right now.
Just MHO.
- Sighuh?
I'm not a QT "fanboy," but I have to point out that GPL != non-commercial.
With the GPLed version, you can do whatever you want, but if you distribute your program, it must also be licensed under the GPL.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Troll tech should trolls be modded up for a change
I hate to tell you this, but they are doing the opposite of what you (and many other C++ developers) are hoping for.
Instead of slowly migrating towards standard C++, the way that other frameworks have, they are taking deliberate steps towards a more proprietary language.
For example, in QT4, they are moving to new template containers, but instead of using the STL (which even MFC developers tend to use) they having decided to develop their own container classes.
I never really understod, how QT or Mysql can release stuff under GPL and non-GPL. How do they handle bugfixes and new features from 3. parties (guessing a bugfix is covered under the GPL)? How do they put it back into the non-GPL version?
I am a C++ developer, and I recognize that KDE/Qt are better in most ways than Gnome/GTK+, but this release is not acceptable to me.
Unfortunately, when TrollTech tries to find the right balance between it's own interests and those of its community, I think it tries to error on its side, but ends up hurting both itself and the community.
Other frameworks are migrating towards the C++ standard, but Qt seems to be migrating away from it, ensuring a lack of interopability of code and skills.
Other technologies are trying to open up to more languages, but TrollTech has decided that C++ (their own version of C++) is all that anyone needs. Even as a C++ developer, I recognize that this is a bad strategy.
Other open-source projects are moving towards cross-platform (eg. AbiWord and Gnumeric will both be available for Windows soon), but TrollTech continues to keep 90+% of the market (ie. Windows) away from open-source Qt developers and their software.
People contributing bug fixes would be aware of the license terms of Qt. If they want their bug fix to be GPL-only then they should clearly state this (TrollTech may ignore the bug fix then).
I'm pretty certain if you sent a block of code to TrollTech in a letter that said "Can you please add this nice fix I made to your code" that in court that would be an acknoledgement that you are allowing TrollTech to copy your code and put it under it's license.
I've been reading a lot of posts to this article which claim that there is no free version of Qt for Windows. If so, then what's this?
I don't program on Windows, so I can't tell definitively, but that web page reads right. It sounds like there's a GPL version for Windows that lets you write non-commercial software without paying a dime to Trolltech. It's based on version 2.3, but it is Qt.
If I'm wrong here, please educate me.
Qt3 also has container classes, Qt4 just has more of them. I for one welcome this, since they are much more useful than the STL ones. Ditto for QString versus string. Standards are great, but the Qt people have the courage to fix their mistakes.
eggbot::startPostgreSQLFUDding {{{/*
Yeah, but PostgreSQL has and . And does qour MySQL have ? Huh? Huh?
--
yeah, ima gnetwo usar. i can compyl a kernal in 2 minites!!
go, gnetwo, go!!
Qt Non-commercial for Windows is based on ancient Qt 2.3.
Qt Non-commercial for Windows requires Microsoft Visual Studio 6, which is priced out of my league. Most hobbyists on Windows would prefer something that works with MinGW, a port of GCC to Windows, and Dev-C++, an IDE around MinGW.
Qt Non-commercial for Windows is not published as source code and is thus incompatible with libraries published under the GNU General Public License.
Qt Non-commercial for Windows is not compatible with selling copies of the program, even at cost: "A non-commercial setting means that you must not use the package in the course of your employment or whilst engaged in activities that will be compensated. A non-commercial application is an application that cannot be sold, leased, rented or otherwise distributed for recompense."
While the STL is a powerfull base of collection structures and algorithms it's not as robust as what Qt has to offer in some respects. std::string, for example, is pretty bare bones as far as it's implementation and developers end up having to create to a whole slew helper functions just to do basic formating operations.
At this point they have only a couple of options: wait for the standards comitte to catch up with the real world (out of the question for a business); standardize on somebody else's library, like boost; or develop their own to fit their customer's needs exactly. I don't think TrollTech is losing sleep over their choice.
I don't think you are understanding the purpose of a standard.
Of course they can come up with something better by starting fresh, tailoring it for their environment, and taking advantage of the passage of time since the standard.
I could improve the whole language pretty easily too, but we need to agree on some standards for lots off reasons (I don't think I need to explain them on
The STL is now generally accepted (more so than std::string, and much more so than std::iostreams).
Visual C++ Toolkit 2003 is the command line compiler, roughly comparable to the MinGW 3.0 distribution; it's not the Studio (IDE). I guessed that Qt for Windows required some sort of IDE integration. Even if not, is Visual C++ 2003 compatible with libraries and project files from Visual Studio 6? There are two differences involved here: newer compiler (different flags) and lack of IDE (possible different project file format).
While not completely free, a book written by two trolls is available here and sold through Amazon.com for $31.49. That book includes a non-commercial version of Qt 3.2 for Windows.
Come on people....
While not completely free, a book written by two trolls is available here and sold through Amazon.com for $31.49. That book includes a non-commercial version of Qt 3.2 for Windows.
So, you are able to develop free apps across both Windows and Linux for a very nominal cost. Consider it a $32 license fee with a free book if you like.
While not completely free, a book written by two trolls is available here and sold through Amazon.com for $31.49. That book includes a non-commercial version of Qt 3.2 for Windows.
Bite the bullet and buy the book. Or consider it $32 for the license and get a free book...
You're right, there are a number of reasons to support standards. But the raison d'etre of standards is simple: compatibility.
This issue is clearly moot in Trolltech's case, because anyone who would be using the QTL is using Qt and will have to distribute libraries anyway.
The side benefits provided by standards can be extensive. For example, using the STL would mean that programmers wouldn't have to learn as much new API.
However, if the standard is ineffective, or the new QTL is enough of an improvement, increased programmer productivity due to the superior tech. will outweigh the initial cost of learning.
The net result of all this is that Trolltech has no reason at all to use the STL merely because it is a de facto "standard."
That's why I can't understand why nobody moderated it Funny.
I don't think you are understanding the purpose of a standard.
I don't think you understand the purpose of a standard. The library standard defines what libraries all C++ implementations must support. The standard is there to allow programmers to assume that certain services are available on all implementations. The standard is not there to force all programmers to use a certain set of services that may not necessarily be the best ones to use.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Gotta love the fact that this whole comment page is filled with plugs for WxWindows and arguments over licenses that I've heard 100 times. Qt is GPL, get over it, so is the linux kernel. You want a Qt backend for Windows, then visit sourceforge or pay up. I don't think anyone actually read the damn article and discuss the new features. The new paint engine, SVG and Unicode Text layout I'm really excited about. Not so much about the template stuff, although interesting.
No thanks, I'm avoiding QT like the plague.
ScottM
The non-commercial Qt windows version is delivered without source. The libary files are NOT COMPATIBLE with visual c++ 7.1 (Microsoft changed the lib format).