Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Mono Project For the most time, I've been firmly in the largest camp when it comes to the Mono debate - the 'I don't care'-camp. With patent lawsuits being hotter than Lady Gaga right now, that changed. For good reason, so it seems; while firmly in the 'ZOMG-MICROSOFT-IS-T3H-EVILL!1!!ONE!'-camp, investigated the five most popular Mono applications, and the conclusion is clear: all of them implement a lot of namespaces which are not covered by Microsoft's community promise thing.
Permalink for comment 453549
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Evil Companies
by vivainio on Tue 14th Dec 2010 19:19 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Evil Companies"
Member since:

Is this your personal opinion or that of your employer - Nokia?

Both. But yeah, Nokia people tend to use Qt and still like it ;-).

I've used Qt.. it's okay. It's nice, but it's no Objective-C, even though Trolltech did a damn fine job making it one of the better C++ UI's out there.

Qt has been advancing by leaps and bounds after TT acquisition. E.g. Qt Quick is all the rage these days.

I'm surprised to see someone likes ObjC, I've understood it doesn't really have much virtues by itself, esp. when compared with C++.


That's debatable, compared to C++. Did MS rewrite IE in C# already? (they might have, didn't check).

Simplicity. Modern features. I seriously could not live without reflection, for example, and reflecting in C++ was painful at best.

Qt provides reflection (meta object protocol).

The fact that adding a virtual method to a base class will break the ABI for everything is really bad. It makes shipping applications a real PITA.

It's alright. You either recompile, or don't add a virtual method to base class. Retaining ABI is important for libraries/frameworks (like Qt), but apps don't really need to care.

Free Nokia advertisement aside - people could do a lot worse than take up Qt. It is probably the least offensive C++ UI library. Now that it has more agreeable licensing, it is probably worth looking at.

To remain on topic, taking a look at Qt is a very good idea when considering to use Mono. You don't risk getting sued (because Nokia clearly can't sue you for using stuff they themselves distribute with open license), and won't be in a "second class" situation (with C#, Microsoft .NET & Windows will always be the first class solution, others are also-ran. With Qt, Linux is a first solution).

Reply Parent Score: 2