Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Trolltech Releases First Qt 4 Technology Preview

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the time-for-a-test-drive dept.

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."

11 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. How soon in KDE? by agent+dero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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
  2. Re:I love Qt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    moolah, or lack thereof.

  3. C++ by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  4. Re:C++, bad news by Qwavel · · Score: 2, Interesting


    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.

  5. The nail in the coffin release by Qwavel · · Score: 3, Interesting


    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.

    1. Re:The nail in the coffin release by jd10131 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I develop commercial software with Qt

      I do not see how Qt is "moving away from the C++ standard" Trolltech produces a library, standards conformance depends upon your compiler.

      Trolltech does not produce their own version of C++; but their library does provide some macros that may appear to change the language. (ie: the new foreach)

      You are free not to use these things, or you may use as much fancy-pants standard C++ as your compiler will let you get away with. I mix Qt and some pretty steep template metaprogramming code with (uh, relative) ease.

      Furthermore, there is are excellent bindings to python, if you'd like to write something in another language. http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/pyqt/

      Trolltech is a company that derives revenue from Qt. Without that revenue TT, and thus Qt, would not exist. I believe the reason for not releasing a regular GPL version for windows is the entrenched culture of piracy.

      There is a book available with a recent version of Qt included on CD. I am not aware of the license it is under, but I've heard the book is quite good.

    2. Re:The nail in the coffin release by Qwavel · · Score: 2, Interesting


      The STL is part of the C++ standard. So, when TT decides to create some new template based container classes, hut to create their own rather than using the STL, I consider this to be non-standard.

      Microsoft did the same thing years ago, back when the standard wasn't ready. People got really mad at them (which was quite ligit because MS knew this would be bad for developers though good for themselves).

      As the standard and its acceptance have improved, MS has improved their compiler and their STL to the point where they are now (v7.1) very good, and very compatible with GCC 3.4 and with Intel. They have not retrofitted the STL to MFC, but they haven't changed MFC much in a long long time. If they came out with a new library at this stage and didn't use the STL I would accuse them of undermining the standard and I would not accept the need to make money as an excuse.

      I understand, of course, that companies don't do these things to be evil, they do it to make money. But TT doesn't do a very good job of balancing the bottom line, with PR, and the general interests of the community. Even they admit that they (not to mention the rest of us) would have been better off if they had GPL'ed QT much sooner.

      Using the version of Qt in the book is dead-end since using it would mean being stuck with that version on all platforms.

  6. Qt Non-commercial version for Windows by SeanAhern · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  7. Re:I love Qt! by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's no free edition for QNX/Photon either. Heck, there's a lot of platforms that don't have native free Qt editions. What's up with that?

    On to a serious note. GTK+ for Windows did not magically pop out of someone's ass. It had to be ported from X11 to Win32 by hand. There is absolutely nothing stopping anyone from doing to same with free edition Qt.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  8. Re:I love Qt! by Qwavel · · Score: 2, Interesting


    On the one hand I agree that wxWidgets is very good.

    On the other hand I think that GTK on Windows looks good and works well.

    wxWidgets is particularly good if you are writing in C++ or Python. GTK is particularly good for C.

    Both are good options.

  9. Re:C++, bad news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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."