Slashdot Mirror
Qt 5 Alpha Released
After nine
months of effort, Nokia's Qt Lab has announced the availability of
the alpha
release of Qt 5. Goals achieved for this release include a new platform
abstraction layer, a re-architected graphics stack, and the
inclusion of Qt Quick as a first-class citizen (hitting version 2.0, and using Google's V8 Javascript engine to boot). Quoting Lars Knoll:
"'Qt 5 should be the foundation for a new way of developing
applications. While offering all of the power of native Qt using C++,
the focus should shift to a model, where C++ is mainly used to
implement modular backend functionality for Qt Quick.' I can say that
we came a good way closer to this vision with Qt 5.0. The model is
working nicely on the embedded side of Qt where UIs are full
screen. On the desktop, we have laid most of the foundations required
for this model, but it’ll take us until 5.1 or 5.2 to really take this
into use."
Nokia has posted the the source and detailed release
notes on the Qt wiki.
What's going to happen with Qt if/when Nokia goes down the drain and gets swallowed by (probably) Microsoft?
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.
And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you ever knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.
... Does QT still break Autoit? http://www.autoitscript.com/site/autoit/ Or is it maintaining programmer arrogance by preventing the users from using computers to automate complexity ... in essence maintaining the dumb downing of the user base by hiding what computers are for????. I'd imagine the Roman Numeral accountants argued only a fool would think nothing has value, so to maintain their high position in society (re: zero place holder of the Hindu-Arabic decimal system.)
Why is there always something in the way of user ease and simplicity in automation?
http://abstractionphysics.net/
Or does it just look too bad?
Looks like more and more focus on mobile development (Qt Quick, Javascript as your UI) and less and less targeting for desktop systems. Which is too bad, and if they are *publicly* announcing that it won't be until 5.2 that the desktop becomes usable again, it looks like it's time to either fork the 4.8 version or start over with some other product.
Why is everyone heading to this "everything is a web app" model? A scripting languages embedded into an app is find but it should be used for quick mods and customization instead of core functionality, and should be layered on top of the application and not the base that the application is built from.
How can you start that sentence but not finish it thusly:
"After nine months of effort, Nokia's Qt Lab has given birth to..."
that they have probably waited too late. Nokia is irrelevant now as far as QT is concerned and so what is MS buys them as some point out? MS is pretty much irrelevant as well. We have to remember that the mobile market is in its infancy and Apple and Google are the only ones poised for growth in this market. Just imagine what its going to be like in 3 or 4 years?
QT was nice - but I would like to know what would prompt anyone, any business or anyone else to be compelled to work with QT when you have the SDK from google and apple and all of the support behind it? Just random thoughts
When your core users are using your software SPECIFICALLY for desktop C++ development, bastardizing the software in some schizophrenic, hopeless pursuit of an area few of them want is quite the wrong way to do it.
On the desktop, it is an extremely fluid, extensible, quick yet powerful way of developing visual applications in a language that many love (C++).
I would quite like it if I could build applications for the core mobile devices under that exact same setup.
But that isn't what they are aiming for, and you're right, their sights seem set on irrelevancy and failure.
I just took a look at QML on Wikipedia and the code examples aren't exactly awesome. I wish they would have stuck closer to JSON syntax.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
QML will seem like Chinese to anyone without some programming experience, so, if they are going to produce anything interesting, they will do it with UI designer applications, not by programming directly in QML.
Poor unsuspecting C++ programmers will then be given the QML code produced by the UI designer tool and try to dhoehorn it to the C++ application. They will feel tortured, because the QML fed to them will be not that readable (most automated code production tools produce awful code), the UI designers will certainly have programmed many horrible abominations using the UI tools, like copying and pasting the same thing over and over, instead of doing it in an object-oriented fashion, and the C++ programmer will simply have to deal with it.
Personally, I have not seen a web designer that he or she could or would code. They avoid coding like a plague. They just do not like coding, and that is why they chose to be designers. On the other hand, C++ programmers do not like scripting languages much. I seriously doubt QML will be of any use to anyone in any project, other than for toy projects.
Fashion is a double edged sword. If you follow fashion, you will stay relevant and 'in'. But you may accidentally introduce problems, especially if you are a software company.
I searched but only Linux/MacOSX and MSVC are detailed.
I hope that doesn't mean that QT 5 is x86/amd64-dependent because V8 is. I would hate for QT to be locked into one architecture.