<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/19064/Qt_4_4_Preview_Published</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:51:11 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>Cocoa QT?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292282</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292282</guid>
			<description>Didn't I read about Mac OS X QT being rewritten to base off Cocoa instead of Carbon?<br />
<br />
Thanks to Trolltech for a consistently superb frameworks.</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:43:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (dogen)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Cocoa QT?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292298</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292298</guid>
			<description>Yeah you did, but they basically didn't make the decision to rewrite to use Cocoa until the announcement that there would be no 64bit Carbon going forward.  As that was just this summer IIRC I don't think they had time to do that rewrite in time for 4.4, though I'd love to be wrong about that <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2007/06/21/wwdc-qt-carbon-64-bit-and-other-buzzwords/" rel="nofollow">http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2007/06/21/wwdc-qt-carbon-64-bit-an...</a> Edited 2007-12-20 00:57</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:55:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (MamiyaOtaru)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Cocoa QT?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292303</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292303</guid>
			<description>yes, this is 4.5 material afaik.<br />
<br />
not like 4.4 doesn't come with enough cool stuff as it is: phonon, webkit, WoC (widgets-on-canvas), QtConcurrent, patternist (xml stuff), tons and tons of bug fixes ......<br />
<br />
i mean, they *had* to leave *something* for 4.5, right? <img src="/images/emo/wink.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:29:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (aseigo)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>kde4?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292306</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292306</guid>
			<description>when will the 4.4 release be integrated with KDE4?<br />
Will KDE4.0 be built on Qt4.4 or will they stay with an older release.<br />
<br />
Given that new KDE technologies such as phonon are in this new Qt release I would expect it to be used in KDE4 fairly well straight away (once it is officially released).<br />
<br />
Anyone have more info?</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 01:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (pixel8r)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: kde4?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292309</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292309</guid>
			<description>&gt; when will the 4.4 release be integrated with KDE4? <br />
<br />
KDE 4.0 is being developed against Qt 4.3 as it is due for release in January, and 4.4 is not expected until the end of Q1 2008.  KDE 4 applications developed against 4.3 should work with Qt 4.4 libraries without any source code changes or recompilation since Qt releases are binary compatible during their life-time.<br />
<br />
There isn't any &quot;integration&quot; required, so to speak.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:15:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (robertknight)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>buffered refresh</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292316</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292316</guid>
			<description>I read somewhere about double-buffered refreshing in qt 4.4, for a flicker free resize by dragging window handles, and <i>also</i> within the window itself.  I'm looking forward to it!</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (thebackwash)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Cocoa QT?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292360</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292360</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">Didn't I read about Mac OS X QT being rewritten to base off Cocoa instead of Carbon? </div><br />
<br />
Correct, we are aiming to have a port of Qt written in Cocoa ready for Qt 4.5.<br />
<br />
<div class="cquote">Thanks to Trolltech for a consistently superb frameworks. </div><br />
Thank you for the kind words!</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (hhartz)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: buffered refresh</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292361</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292361</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">I read somewhere about double-buffered refreshing in qt 4.4, for a flicker free resize by dragging window handles, and also within the window itself. I'm looking forward to it! </div><br />
<br />
Yes, this is the &quot;Alien widget integration&quot; discussed in <br />
<br />
   <a href="http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2007/08/09/qt-invaded-by-aliens-the-end-of-all-flicker/" rel="nofollow">http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2007/08/09/qt-invaded-by-aliens-the...</a></description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:51:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (hhartz)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Something is missing from it, though.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292402</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292402</guid>
			<description>Garbage collection! Qt should should use Boehm's gc to provide the best programming experience!</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 12:48:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (axilmar)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>it'll be interesting</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292502</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292502</guid>
			<description>to what the development community can do with the 'sexy' bits of the new Qt version. A simple, ubiquitous multimedia API and html engine are very powerful components and will make a lot of previously hard things quite simple going forward. Good times ahead <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (borker)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: kde4?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292514</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292514</guid>
			<description>Yes but for how long will KDE be &quot;handicapped&quot; by Qt 4.3 ?  I mean it seems that it would be best if they used what the Qt provides instead of maintaining their own.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:27:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (CaptainPinko)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Something is missing from it, though.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292532</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292532</guid>
			<description>Please correct me if I'm wrong because I don't really know much about this (and would like to) but:<br />
<br />
Can't you just use Boehm's gc by yourself in your app ? Does the framework need to support it anyhow ?<br />
<br />
I've been thinking in trying libgc with Gtk+ and I think the answer wouldn't be that different so, that's why I'm asking.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:22:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (AlexandreAM)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: kde4?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292533</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292533</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">...instead of maintaining their own. </div><br />
<br />
KDE does not and never has maintained their own version of Qt.<br />
<br />
KDE 4.0 will use Qt4.3 because this is the version available at this time.<br />
<br />
Since Qt4.4 will be available when releasing KDE 4.1, features developed for 4.1 can obviously make use of any new features available in Qt4.4</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 20:23:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (anda_skoa)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: kde4?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292553</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292553</guid>
			<description>On the wekit side, the default html engine in KDE4.0 is still khmtl and it is (trying to come up with a nice, non-inflammatory word here) <i>undecided</i> whether or not there will be an eventual switch to webkit from khtml.<br />
<br />
As far as the phonon development is concerned trolltech (to their great credit) are contributing directly into the KDE svn tree rather than maintaining their own phonon branch, so KDE already has all of their work in that area available to them (and visa versa of course).<br />
<br />
So, of all the other goodness, a fair percentage doesn't really have a KDE implementation so there won't really have to be a point where they stop developing their own code and switch over to TTs or try and maintain parallel branches or anything.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (borker)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Something is missing from it, though.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?292850</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?292850</guid>
			<description>All QObject-derived class instances are automatically deleted when their parent object is destroyed. You mostly don't need to worry about garbage collection.</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:11:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (slougi)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
