Timeline for Why aren't more desktop apps written with Qt? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
61 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 26, 2023 at 11:38 | comment | added | Kitswas | The question and the answers are pretty old. What are the newest stats and arguments about the use of Qt? I am not in the industry proper, still a student, but I find Qt pretty nice for GUI apps. I have a created a couple of apps with Qt 6 and haven't encountered much trouble for the reasons listed. | |
| Nov 22, 2022 at 20:05 | comment | added | ManuelSchneid3r | Nobody mentioned: QObject does not allow multiple inheritance and no templates. Thats what acutally bugs me the most. It cuts down C++' power. Besides that should not be that relevant if you use e.g. boost for signal-slots. Widgets are great. | |
| Sep 29, 2018 at 17:40 | history | protected | gnat | ||
| Aug 3, 2016 at 14:29 | comment | added | Colliot | The best dictionary software I have ever seen, GoldenDict, is written in Qt. So is TeXstudio, the best TeX editor IMHO. | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 17:12 | comment | added | kayleeFrye_onDeck | I started using it in a commercial setting with C++, recently. I used PyQt in the past, which was fairly solid. My gripes aren't deal-breakers, but they're valid. Qt community is full of #$%$^#^!-holes, so asking for help at their forums is just asking for someone to come by and say, "read the documentation noob", or along those lines. Code snippets are sparse, while generic documentation is gigantic, which just exacerbates the issue. It also does not play well with STL, but since it pre-dates STL, that shouldn't be too surprising. All-in-all I like it, but I have no C++ alternative, really. | |
| Feb 4, 2016 at 17:49 | comment | added | Edwin Rodríguez | It is not used because ignorance about Qt and modern C++ | |
| Aug 20, 2015 at 19:54 | comment | added | rbaleksandar | Frankly compatibility is definitely not something that Qt is famous for. Even the developers (currently Digia) have stated on multiple times (see some of their presentations) that they do not guarantee even compatibility between minor releases. I haven't experienced issues like this but I know people who have. This alone is a huge put-off for developers who require predictability and stability. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 21:41 | comment | added | osirisgothra | "done implicitly at runtime" should be replaced with "done POORLY at runtime", most gc sucks for the most part and at best case, only gives you half the optimization you would normally get on your own, and lets not get started down the cache miss/page fault road of the conversation--YIKES! | |
| Oct 31, 2013 at 23:06 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Nov 1, 2013 at 11:05 | |||||
| Sep 20, 2013 at 8:22 | history | closed |
gnat Dan Pichelman CommunityBot thorsten müller mattnz |
Opinion-based | |
| Sep 18, 2013 at 7:13 | review | Close votes | |||
| Sep 20, 2013 at 8:22 | |||||
| Sep 18, 2013 at 6:53 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by user102518 | ||
| Aug 27, 2013 at 20:56 | answer | added | user100691 | timeline score: 5 | |
| Dec 1, 2012 at 1:00 | comment | added | Giorgio | "doesn't require you AT ALL to think about anything...": Then we should abolish smart pointers and similar constructs, since they are not needed. | |
| Dec 1, 2012 at 0:48 | comment | added | MFH | @Giorgio: Notice that your argument gets moot the second that IDisposable is involved. Especially compared to C++'s stack based allocation, which doesn't require you AT ALL to think about anything... | |
| Nov 21, 2012 at 6:52 | comment | added | Giorgio | My argument is that C# has automatic garbage collection, in C++ you have to add / implement it (this feature nonsense seems to be widely accepted, see Wikipedia: "In computer science, abstraction is the process by which data and programs are defined with a representation similar in form to its meaning (semantics), while hiding away the implementation details.", en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_%28computer_science%29). Therefore, wrt memory management, C# is more abstract than C++. | |
| Nov 21, 2012 at 0:39 | comment | added | Billy ONeal |
@Giorgio: I'm not talking about memory management at all when I speak of ownership. I'm talking about "who is allowed to read from or write to this data structure" kinds of ownership. Your argument for "language x is more abstract than language y because it has feature z" is nonsense. C# doesn't have const, which makes it difficult to express immutability constructs in that language. Does that mean C++ is "more abstract" than C#? No. Abstraction is not a series of levels that languages need various features to achieve.
|
|
| Nov 20, 2012 at 21:46 | comment | added | Giorgio | @Billy ONeal: (BTW, I am a C++ programmer) Of course you will have to think about how much data you allocate in any language (even Lisp, Haskell, etc) because they are all executed on the same underlying computer. I did not say that using explicit memory management is a failing of C++, I am saying that it is less abstract compared to a language in which it is done automatically. In C++ you can better optimize memory management, but you have to program it yourself (lower abstraction level), in other languages this is done implicitly by the runtime, which can have performance costs, of course. | |
| Nov 20, 2012 at 21:36 | comment | added | Billy ONeal |
@Giorgio: Erm, you do have to think about such things in C#. The concept of "who owns this" goes far beyond "who calls delete". The fact that the smart pointers make that explicit isn't a language failing; and if you don't think about such things you are going to generate garbage in any high level language I've seen too.
|
|
| Nov 20, 2012 at 21:20 | comment | added | Giorgio |
Exactly: you have to use shared_ptr or unique_ptr explicitly to implement memory management. In C# you do not need it: you just create objects and use them. In this sense, C# has a higher abstraction level.
|
|
| Nov 20, 2012 at 21:16 | comment | added | Billy ONeal |
@Giorgio: Why are you managing memory manually in C++? You shouldn't be. Make shared_ptr / unique_ptr do that instead.
|
|
| Nov 20, 2012 at 20:56 | comment | added | Giorgio | "Can you, please, give an example where C# is higher than C++?": Garbage collection: in C++ you have to manage memory yourself, C# abstract away from this and has memory management built into the language (AFAIK, I am not a C# programmer, you do not have to program memory management in C# explicitly). | |
| Nov 20, 2012 at 19:48 | comment | added | Warren P | TWO apps I use every day: TortoiseHG is written using python wrappers for QT. kdiff3 is a diff/merge tool for both linux and windows, written in C++ using QT. Two is a lot. | |
| Nov 20, 2012 at 18:52 | comment | added | Malcolm | @BillyONeal If you compare the amount of code, then you may give an edge to the languages that exist for a longer time but not necessarily are popular now. And also code in open source projects doesn't necessarily reflect the languages used in production. There is no accurate measure, you just have to select some parameter and stick to it. | |
| Nov 20, 2012 at 16:24 | answer | added | Inigo | timeline score: 128 | |
| Oct 3, 2012 at 13:35 | answer | added | Obrix | timeline score: 4 | |
| Aug 23, 2012 at 16:32 | answer | added | Martin Beckett | timeline score: 13 | |
| Aug 23, 2012 at 15:53 | answer | added | Eric Brown | timeline score: 36 | |
| Jun 29, 2012 at 10:31 | answer | added | W.K.S | timeline score: 17 | |
| S Oct 19, 2011 at 16:14 | history | suggested | Mike Partridge | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
made title more specific, clarity
|
| Oct 19, 2011 at 16:11 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Oct 19, 2011 at 16:14 | |||||
| Oct 19, 2011 at 13:01 | answer | added | Adam Hawes | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 19, 2011 at 11:24 | answer | added | Caleb | timeline score: 5 | |
| Oct 19, 2011 at 10:24 | comment | added | MattDavey | ohloh.com has some very nice metrics for this sort of thing - ohloh.net/languages?query=&sort=total | |
| Oct 19, 2011 at 10:13 | answer | added | mouviciel | timeline score: 1 | |
| S Oct 19, 2011 at 9:59 | history | suggested | Abbas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed grammar, corrected sentence structure
|
| Oct 19, 2011 at 9:51 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Oct 19, 2011 at 9:59 | |||||
| Jul 4, 2011 at 6:25 | vote | accept | Dehumanizer | ||
| Jul 4, 2011 at 0:10 | comment | added | back2dos | @Billy ONeal: In fact GitHub has the only statistics I found, which puts C & C++ a lot further behind. Anyways, the question here was actually about popularity (as in number of developers) and not use (as in amount of code). Of course the number of searches is not necessarily proportional to the number of developers, but it is an indicator. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 17:22 | comment | added | Billy ONeal | I don't think the TIOBE index is a really accurate measure, because it measures popularity, not use. Comparing amount of code in open source repositories like GitHub, Bitbucket, Codeplex, and Sourceforge would give more accurate measurements. (And I believe those more accurate measurements put C and C++ in #1 and #2 spots -- Java has an unfair advantage in the TIOBE index because it's used for freshman college courses, and new programmers make more buzz than experienced ones do) | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 12:18 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @back2dos: I have no grounds on which to suggest that you're wrong, but I certainly hope that that is not the case! :) | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 11:45 | answer | added | bastibe | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 10:39 | comment | added | back2dos | @Tomalak: Possibly, yes. As I pointed out to Dehumanizer, I think the keyword is managed here in fact. I can only speculate, but I believe many programmers prefer the comfort and safety of that. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 10:14 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @back2dos: True. Well, ok, how about developers don't necessarily prefer higher-level languages, but there may simply be more demand for work in them. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 10:14 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @Dehumanizer: It's all relative of course, but C++ is considered a "low-level language" where something like C# or PHP would be a "high-level language". | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:53 | comment | added | back2dos | @Tomalak: What it also says is that those two together take up 25%, while the higher level-languages in that list take up 55%, (the total being 84%). | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:53 | comment | added | back2dos | @Dehumanizer: I suppose what he means is managed languages. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:22 | comment | added | Dehumanizer | @user16764: What you mean by saying higher level languages, isn't C++ a high-level language? Of course it provides low-level 'functionality', but that's a 'feature' which can be ignored and used only high-level mechanisms. Can you, please, give an example where C# is higher than C++? | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:19 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @back2dos: Funny, that table implies to me that all the higher-level languages (OK, debateable about Java) are less popular than C and C++. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:18 | comment | added | back2dos | @Tomalak: A quick look at the TIOBE index should help ;) | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:10 | answer | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | timeline score: 8 | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 9:09 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @user16764: "Most"? | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 7:59 | comment | added | edA-qa mort-ora-y | The two-edged sword of backwards compatibility has left Qt with many anachronisms, unfixable defects, and other poor behaviour. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 7:20 | answer | added | Edward Strange | timeline score: 39 | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 6:30 | answer | added | btilly | timeline score: 30 | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 6:29 | answer | added | Billy ONeal | timeline score: 186 | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 6:27 | history | edited | Dehumanizer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed grammar
|
| Jul 1, 2011 at 6:26 | comment | added | SK-logic | Bindings to the languages other than C++ are either incomplete, clumsy or do not even exist. Only the Python bindings seems to be ok. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 6:26 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/86681981282295808 | ||
| Jul 1, 2011 at 6:25 | comment | added | user16764 | It's native C++. Most developers would prefer higher level languages such as C#. | |
| Jul 1, 2011 at 5:58 | history | asked | Dehumanizer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |