Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd Sep 2006 20:50 UTC, submitted by IdaAshley
Permalink for comment 165237
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-08-27
Sadly it's the only true cross-platform toolkit now.
Huh? What about Qt? What disqualifies it? I write *true* cross-platform code with Qt professionally. It's what I do. Currently I'm porting a client's ancient MFC-4.0 code to WinXP, Mac OSX, Linux and multiple flavors of Unix. On each platform the appropriate *native* low level libraries are used. Heck, in 4.2 dialog buttons even get reordered according to platform!
How is this not "true cross-platform"?
While you may have a personal dislike for Qt, and find it doesn't meet your project's needs, you cannot argue that it is not true cross-platform. Because it is.