Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 10:55 UTC
Qt Nokia today announced the availability of version 4.5 of the Qt cross-platform application and UI framework. It also introduced Qt Creator, a new lightweight cross-platform IDE. Qt 4.5 and Qt Creator combined comprises the Qt SDK, an easy to install package that will let developers create applications quickly and easily. "Qt 4.5 is setting the benchmark for application development," said Benoit Schillings, Chief Technologist, Qt Software, Nokia (and for those who remember, one of the original BeOS developers). It's also the first release of Qt under the LGPL.
Order by: Score:
qtc and kdev
by l3v1 on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 13:01 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

This sums it up fairly well: http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2008/11/qt-creator-kdevelop.html

What I see is qtcreator is nice, but it's not enough. The integration and richness in tools and project handling of kdevelop is much better, even with its faults, and I don't see what could make me stop using it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: qtc and kdev
by Sandlord on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 13:32 UTC in reply to "qtc and kdev"
Sandlord Member since:
2006-07-12

This sums it up fairly well: http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2008/11/qt-creator-kdevelop.html

What I see is qtcreator is nice, but it's not enough. The integration and richness in tools and project handling of kdevelop is much better, even with its faults, and I don't see what could make me stop using it.


*sigh*
Why does everybody compare Qt-Creator with kdevelop ?

Qt-Creator was never designed to be a kdevelop replacement, it was just an IDE to do especially C++ development with Qt and their build system qmake.

Since kdevelop cannot parse my qmake files I use Qt-Creator and I am quite happy with this IDE.

btw: Your link is a little bit outdated: In the meantime Qt-Creator added support for svn, git and cmake.

Edited 2009-03-03 13:33 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: qtc and kdev
by vivainio on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 18:28 UTC in reply to "RE: qtc and kdev"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Why does everybody compare Qt-Creator with kdevelop ?


Because they are both IDEs?

Since kdevelop cannot parse my qmake files I use Qt-Creator and I am quite happy with this IDE.

kdevelop doesn't need to parse your qmake files - you can easily import the project with "custom buildsystem".

The fact is that kdevelop and qmake almost completely overlap - kdevelop is burdened by kde 3.x dependency (mostly a problem with windows) and the baroque UI, and qt creator by its relative immaturity (kdevelop is pretty much rock solid now).

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: qtc and kdev
by Sandlord on Wed 4th Mar 2009 15:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: qtc and kdev"
Sandlord Member since:
2006-07-12

"Why does everybody compare Qt-Creator with kdevelop ?


Because they are both IDEs?
"
They both have different goals, that's why you should not compare them. Qt-Creator is minimalistic and special purpose, and the developers said it themselves: They don't want to compete with bigger solutions like eclipse or kdevelop.



kdevelop doesn't need to parse your qmake files - you can easily import the project with "custom buildsystem".

I work on a multi platform project with 56 subprojects and unit tests with over 1000 files. As long as I had a working qmake project manager I could add/remove files out of kdevelop and select the project to debug and so on. I cannot not do that as comfortable with a custom buildsystem.
I choose my tools with the lowest work overhead and in the moment that is Qt-Creator for Linux/MacOSX and VC2008 + VisualAssist on Windows.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: qtc and kdev
by vivainio on Wed 4th Mar 2009 20:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: qtc and kdev"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

They both have different goals, that's why you should not compare them. Qt-Creator is minimalistic and special purpose, and the developers said it themselves: They don't want to compete with bigger solutions like eclipse or kdevelop.


But it just doesn't seem too hard competing with other C++ ide's, since qtc already has 1) intellisense, 2) gdb integration, 3) context based code navigation. If what remains is just parsing some project files to determine what source files are part of the project, it's not a stretch to assume that some qt creator fan will want to add that stuff to the app (it's open source after all).

I choose my tools with the lowest work overhead and in the moment that is Qt-Creator for Linux/MacOSX and VC2008 + VisualAssist on Windows.


Ditto. ATM it's kscope & gdb (because of what the environment dictates - a non-ide seems to be easiest to manage in scratchbox environment). I'm keenly following where the next gen IDEs will take us (qt creator broadening its scope, kdevelop4 coming out, CDT maturing up). Good times ahead - a while ago kdevelop was the only one worth using at all.

Reply Score: 1

RE: qtc and kdev
by moondevil on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 13:33 UTC in reply to "qtc and kdev"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

For those of us stuck in Windows land is a very welcome IDE.

Now I can very easily set up a QT based development environment with free tools.

The previous solutions of QT + (whatever IDE) + mingw was a bit cumbersome to set up.

Reply Score: 6

RE: qtc and kdev
by boudewijn on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 13:36 UTC in reply to "qtc and kdev"
boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

But then, the goal of Qt Creator wasn't to make you or anyone else stop using kdevelop (which I use myself, too, KDevelop4 is simply amazing), but to give people who now use an editor+command line combination something that's as fast and comfortable to use but that makes debugging easier.

I'm not convinced that it does, but I use it on OSX and Windows where KDevelop doesn't yet run, and it's a fine editor with some nice and handy touches.

I haven't managed to make it build and debug my projects, though :-)

(Oh, and what I particularly like about Qt Creator is that it is a nice, big example of how to structure a Qt application with plugins and everything. It's very instructive to browse through its source.)

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: qtc and kdev
by boudewijn on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 15:06 UTC in reply to "RE: qtc and kdev"
boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

Just to clarify: I'm using cmake, which while supported, isn't really done yet, and besides, I'm using cmake with visual c++ on Windows and on OSX, and cmake support for those platforms aren't tested yet.

And when I'm working on Unix, I'm working on KOffice, and a CMake project of the magnitude of KOffice really stretches any IDE (but Qt Creator loads the KOffice project from the CMakeLists.txt files _perfectly_, so it's a very useful IDE for my purposes anyway.)

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: qtc and kdev
by TemporalBeing on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 19:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: qtc and kdev"
TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

CMake has run with VC++ for a long time on Windows. OSX, don't know; but Windows definately.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: qtc and kdev
by boudewijn on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 22:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: qtc and kdev"
boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

I know, and that's why we use cmake. It's just that the cmake integration in Qt Creator doesn't support that yet -- the generator for unix makefiles is hard-coded in Qt Creator, for now.

Reply Score: 3

RE: qtc and kdev
by dagw on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 14:04 UTC in reply to "qtc and kdev"
dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

The integration and richness in tools and project handling of kdevelop is much better, even with its faults, and I don't see what could make me stop using it.

Note I haven't tested qt creator yet, so I have no idea how good it actually is. That being said...
Qt creator has one big potential strength and that is cross platform development. Doing cross platform Qt development with the free tools has never been trivial. If this new IDE will let me easily open, work on and compile the same project on Linux, Windows and OS X with minimum fiddling then I'm interested.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: qtc and kdev
by danieldk on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 21:28 UTC in reply to "RE: qtc and kdev"
danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

Qt creator has one big potential strength and that is cross platform development.


True. But besides that it is also a very nice IDE. I have been using Qt Creator since the first betas. I have tried KDevelop in the past, it was to messy for me (coming from plain Makefiles + vi). I though Eclipse was ok environment-wise, but unfortunately it was to slow for me (I don't want to wait a few seconds for completion). So far, Qt Creator has been great for me. It is clean, feels slightly minimalistic, but has all the nice stuff: completion, quick search(/replace), look ups, etc.

Edited 2009-03-03 21:28 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Source download
by IndigoJo on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 13:32 UTC
IndigoJo
Member since:
2005-07-06

Has anyone found a reliable source download location yet? I can't connect to their Norwegian FTP site, and the mirrors either have no copy of Qt 4.5 or a broken one (e.g. heanet.ie). I'm looking for the X11 version.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Source download
by hhartz on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 14:10 UTC in reply to "Source download"
hhartz Member since:
2007-05-31
Gtk visual integration
by puelocesar on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 14:45 UTC
puelocesar
Member since:
2008-10-30

I'm using the RC on my Ubuntu Jaunty and I must say the Gtk integration is flawless! With it, Arora looks more a Gnome application then Firefox! Very nice work

Now I don't have anymore the dilemma of liking both Gnome and Qt4

Reply Score: 2

RE: Gtk visual integration
by segedunum on Wed 4th Mar 2009 12:36 UTC in reply to "Gtk visual integration"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Yer, it's just a pity that the GTK and Gnome guys aren't receptive to that kind of integration themselves.

Edited 2009-03-04 12:37 UTC

Reply Score: 3

pyqt
by FunkyELF on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 15:50 UTC
FunkyELF
Member since:
2006-07-26

Waiting to see if PyQt will be LGPL so I will know whether to throw my book away and wait for someone else to create LGPL QT bindings for python.

Reply Score: 2

RE: pyqt
by Richard Dale on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 16:26 UTC in reply to "pyqt"
Richard Dale Member since:
2005-07-22

Waiting to see if PyQt will be LGPL so I will know whether to throw my book away and wait for someone else to create LGPL QT bindings for python.


I think you may be waiting a long time. If there is already a high quality GPL'd version of a Python binding for Qt, why would anyone want to spend entire man-years redoing a new one with a slightly different license?

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: pyqt
by FunkyELF on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE: pyqt"
FunkyELF Member since:
2006-07-26

The difference is substantial. It means the difference between being able to create commercial closed source apps and not.

If he doesn't LGPL it someone else will create an LGPL'd binding.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: pyqt
by leos on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 17:44 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: pyqt"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

The difference is substantial. It means the difference between being able to create commercial closed source apps and not.


Not true. Riverbank offers commercial licenses of PyQt, so you can write closed source commercial apps with it just fine. You just can't do it for free.

If he doesn't LGPL it someone else will create an LGPL'd binding.


Highly unlikely, but anything is possible.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: pyqt
by Richard Dale on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 17:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: pyqt"
Richard Dale Member since:
2005-07-22

The difference is substantial. It means the difference between being able to create commercial closed source apps and not.


I'm not talking about the difference from the point of view of someone using the bindings, I'm talking about the point of view of this person who you expect to develop the bindings. You really believe someone is going to donate 1-2 years of their time in order that you don't have to pay 350 pounds or so for a commercial PyQt license? What's in it for them?

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: pyqt
by trenchsol on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 18:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: pyqt"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

I think that vendor does no want to allow you and the others to use their work in order to create proprietary applications. They probably have some interest in doing so. Perhaps they want to retain an advantage over the other proprietary developers. They have every right to do that.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: pyqt
by elsewhere on Wed 4th Mar 2009 06:28 UTC in reply to "RE: pyqt"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

I think you may be waiting a long time. If there is already a high quality GPL'd version of a Python binding for Qt, why would anyone want to spend entire man-years redoing a new one with a slightly different license?


I think you're overstating it a bit. Riverbank is mostly a one-man operation. I don't want to understate the work involved, but I don't think it would amount to man-years to duplicate if someone or some group was intent on doing so.

Riverbank has every right to continue with the GPL/commercial model that Qt had. PyQt is a fine, and popular, product.

BUT, I suspect the LGPL announcement took the wind out of their sails. Compared to the license fee for Qt, a PyQt commerical license was incremental for commercial development. While it is still nominal in the overall scheme of things, at least in terms of commercial developers that measure value by ROI rather than absolute cost, it now stands out amongst an LGPL'd Qt field with LGPL'd bindings for other languages.

I don't begrudge Riverbank's model, all the more power to them for the time and effort they've extended over the years, I just suspect that they're going to have to figure out how to adapt to the new licensing scheme while still remaining viable. Nature abhors a vacuum, and I'd be surprised if an alternative didn't spring up otherwise.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: pyqt
by Richard Dale on Wed 4th Mar 2009 11:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: pyqt"
Richard Dale Member since:
2005-07-22

[q]I think you may be waiting a long time. If there is already a high quality GPL'd version of a Python binding for Qt, why would anyone want to spend entire man-years redoing a new one with a slightly different license?


I think you're overstating it a bit. Riverbank is mostly a one-man operation. I don't want to understate the work involved, but I don't think it would amount to man-years to duplicate if someone or some group was intent on doing so.

You're welcome to believe what you like about the man effort involved in writing high quality complete bindings for the Qt apis.

I speak as the developer of several Qt language bindings (QtJava, QtRuby and Qyoto C#), and should have some idea of how much work is involved. For instance, I've been working on QtRuby for over five years, including 2 years full time, and I can tell you that I still have a big todo list.

There are python bindings based on PyQt for KDE too, and any replacement project would need to replace that work too, while managing to keep the community on their side.

Reply Score: 4

RE: pyqt
by IndigoJo on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 20:53 UTC in reply to "pyqt"
IndigoJo Member since:
2005-07-06

It won't happen unless Nokia (or a similarly sized company) takes over Riverbank Computing as well as Trolltech. Riverbank, like Trolltech, is a small software company which depends on selling commercial licences.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: pyqt
by vivainio on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 20:59 UTC in reply to "RE: pyqt"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

It won't happen unless Nokia (or a similarly sized company) takes over Riverbank Computing as well as Trolltech. Riverbank, like Trolltech, is a small software company which depends on selling commercial licences.

That is pure speculation. Riverbank has neither accepted nor declined the requests to go LGPL at some point.

Luckily, the commercial license for full setup is much cheaper now that you don't need to buy Qt library in addition to PyQt anymore.

Reply Score: 2

Creator
by J.R. on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 21:43 UTC
J.R.
Member since:
2007-07-25

I liked the IDE, but still hate the actual form designer...its really chaotic to use compared with the VS.NET one.

Reply Score: 2

Performance improvements - backports?
by lemur2 on Tue 3rd Mar 2009 22:08 UTC
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

I can see how the upcoming KDE 4.3 would gain from performance improvements in Qt4.5 (which is very welcome because KDE 4.2 is already a good performer), but what about the KDE 3.5.x series? What version of Qt does it, or can it, use? AFAIK there was "breakage" between Qt3.x and Qt4, and that this in part was a major reason for the whole KDE3/KDE4 rewrite.

AFAIK though, KDE3 applications can be run on a KDE4 desktop ... but do they have to be re-compiled against the newer Qt libraries, or some "translation" libraries, in order to do so? Or is it somehow possible to use Qt4.5 as the "heart" of newer versions of KDE3?

Will KDE3 see any benefit at all from Qt4.5 and the LGPL licensing of this Qt version and later, or does this announcement effectively mark the start of the "putting out to pasture" of the KDE3 desktop?

Reply Score: 2

boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

No. A KDE3 application uses Qt3, not Qt4. It is impossible, except through porting, that is, changing the source code, to compile a KDE3 application against Qt4. Note that in addition to porting the application code, you will also have to port the library code of KDE3, and then you will end up with... KDE4.

It's totally simple:

KDE 1.x -- Qt 1.x
KDE 2.x -- Qt 2.x
KDE 3.x -- Qt 3.x
KDE 4.x -- Qt 4.x

where the x doesn't need to the same value on both sides of the --...

Reply Score: 5

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

No. A KDE3 application uses Qt3, not Qt4. It is impossible, except through porting, that is, changing the source code, to compile a KDE3 application against Qt4. Note that in addition to porting the application code, you will also have to port the library code of KDE3, and then you will end up with... KDE4. It's totally simple: KDE 1.x -- Qt 1.x KDE 2.x -- Qt 2.x KDE 3.x -- Qt 3.x KDE 4.x -- Qt 4.x where the x doesn't need to the same value on both sides of the --...


This is what I thought. So when one runs KDE3 applications from one's distribution on one's KDE4 desktop (as an example I have been using K3B, which according to its "About" dialog is still a KDE3 application) ... I take it that Kubuntu have re-compiled the KDE3 source code of K3B against the KDE4/Qt4 libraries so that it would run? Or is it the case that the Kubuntu distribution (and others like it such as Mandriva) ships with both Qt4 and Qt3 libraries installed?

Reply Score: 2

FishB8 Member since:
2006-01-16

Both the Qt3 and Qt4 libraries are installed. You can't compile a KDE3 app against the Qt4 libraries. (or vice-versa) While they are related, the APIs are not compatible.

Reply Score: 4

ralsina Member since:
2007-08-14

No, you are just running KDE3 and KDE4 apps at the same time. They just use different toolkits (Qt3 and Qt4), just like you can run Qt4 and GTK apps.

Reply Score: 3

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

No, you are just running KDE3 and KDE4 apps at the same time. They just use different toolkits (Qt3 and Qt4), just like you can run Qt4 and GTK apps.


OK, so installing and running KDE3, KDE4 and GTK applications on the one system takes up three libraries worth of disk space. Presumably if one runs one of each type of application, one has three sets of libraries loaded into RAM at the same time as well.

This makes a very good case for dropping one set from ones set of installed applications, IMHO.

Given that OpenOffice & Firefox are GTK applications, and given that KDE4 and Qt4 are the areas that are receiving almost all of the ongoing development attention ... this in turn is starting to make a strong case IMHO for dropping all the KDE3 applications from one's installation.

I hope that those KDE3 apps that have not yet been ported to KDE4 (K3B I'm looking at you) get a hurry on, then, or I'll have to replace them with a GTK application instead. Maybe it is time to look at Brasero?

Reply Score: 2

ralsina Member since:
2007-08-14

You are talking about 85 cents of hard disk space and maybe $2 of RAM.

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

You are talking about 85 cents of hard disk space and maybe $2 of RAM.


The disk space is not as important, I'd agree, but RAM is quite often constrained on many systems still in use. Even some systems built in very recent times, such as some netbooks or handhelds such as Nokia Internet Table, are quite modest in terms of the available RAM.

I'd rather not have my systems heading in the same direction as Vista, if its all the same to you.

Reply Score: 2

ralsina Member since:
2007-08-14

And you are not using k3b in a handheld or a netbook, so that's a non sequitur.

BTW: I increased 4x the memory on my asus eee 701 4g for U$S 35 last week, to 2GB.

So, what specific device and app are you talking about here?

Reply Score: 1

elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

Given that OpenOffice & Firefox are GTK applications,


No, they are not really. They more or less use their own self-contained application environments, and then utilize GTK for superficial linux "integration" (think filepickers etc.). This is actually worse, it's like using two different sets of libraries for your application, and is why both applications are not very resource friendly regardless of the DE they are running in.

and given that KDE4 and Qt4 are the areas that are receiving almost all of the ongoing development attention ... this in turn is starting to make a strong case IMHO for dropping all the KDE3 applications from one's installation.

I hope that those KDE3 apps that have not yet been ported to KDE4 (K3B I'm looking at you) get a hurry on, then, or I'll have to replace them with a GTK application instead. Maybe it is time to look at Brasero?


There's no point dropping KDE3 apps for a user that finds the KDE3 apps useful and functional. They work just as well in KDE4, as KDE4 apps will work in KDE3. Yes, there is an additional memory footprint, but seriously, on even a semi-modern system, it's virtually inconsequential. I suspect many distros will do what openSUSE will be doing, and just making the kde3 base packages (kdebase and kdelibs) available as dependencies for any legacy kde3 apps. It's not that big a footprint.

Reply Score: 6

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

With current amounts of HDD space & RAM such library overhead is practically negligible, ignore it IMHO.

Reply Score: 1

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

In case I need it, here is independent backup for my statement "KDE 4.2 is already a good performer".

http://www.itnewstoday.com/?p=198

I am also running Kubuntu Jaunty right now on my EEEPC netbook, and it is quite acceptably fast even on the netbook, even when running at low performance mode on batteries it is still useable. (I haven't noticed any problem with wireless connectivity either ... hmmmm).

Anyway, Kubuntu 9.04 of course uses KDE 4.2, and I believe that in turn uses Qt4.4, so the performance improvements offered by this release of Qt4.5 won't be available in Kubuntu until KDE 4.3 in Karmic. But it is nevertheless nice to know it is coming. At a time when other desktop environments seem to be getting bogged down and slowing, it is always welcome news to hear about an upcoming performance improvement in the desktop that one is using.

Reply Score: 2

No support for VC++ as yet.
by axilmar on Wed 4th Mar 2009 08:17 UTC
axilmar
Member since:
2006-03-20

What if we don't want to use Mingw?

Reply Score: 1

RE: No support for VC++ as yet.
by FishB8 on Thu 5th Mar 2009 04:17 UTC in reply to "No support for VC++ as yet."
FishB8 Member since:
2006-01-16

I would be very surprised if Qt4 compiled with MSVC++.

Reply Score: 1

boudewijn Member since:
2006-03-05

You meant "not surprised", right? Of course Qt4 can be compiled with msvc++ -- I'm doing it all the time. It's just that there's no binary download of the SDK compiled with msvc++, and that the cmake support in Qt Creator has hardcoded parameters for mingw.

Reply Score: 3

Hold the phone!
by lemur2 on Wed 4th Mar 2009 12:05 UTC
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

It looks like Adept Updater for Kubuntu Jaunty (Alpha 5 version at this time) has just downloaded Qt 4.5 on my machine.

I'll let you know how it goes when Adept finishes. If I don't post for a while, you will know it didn't go well I suppose ...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Hold the phone!
by lemur2 on Wed 4th Mar 2009 12:40 UTC in reply to "Hold the phone!"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

It looks like Adept Updater for Kubuntu Jaunty (Alpha 5 version at this time) has just downloaded Qt 4.5 on my machine.

I'll let you know how it goes when Adept finishes. If I don't post for a while, you will know it didn't go well I suppose ...


Well I'm back!

Kubuntu Jaunty runs pretty quick on my main machine, (but because it is still alpha I do get a few application crashes) and to be honest I can't say if Qt4.5 gave it a performance boost or not.

I still is very sprightly though, regardless, so at least it didn't slow down.

Reply Score: 2

QtCreator+TDM gcc
by fithisux on Thu 5th Mar 2009 09:20 UTC
fithisux
Member since:
2006-01-22

good combination.

Reply Score: 2