Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 21st Sep 2010 21:32 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Qt After many months of designing, coding, reviewing, testing and documenting, Qt 4.7.0 is finally ready for the big time. Although it's a little more than nine months since Qt's last feature release (4.6.0 on December 1, 2009), the seeds of some of the new stuff in 4.7 were sown much earlier. Indeed, many of the ideas behind the biggest new feature in Qt 4.7.0, Qt Quick, were born more than two years ago, not long after Qt 4.4 was released
Thread beginning with comment 442514
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
axilmar
Member since:
2006-03-20

Since you are not requred to use MOC to utilize the Qt libraries, it's by your own reasoning pure C++.


How is it pure C++, when it requires me to alter the way I work? with pure C++, you only need a text editor and the compiler.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Morty Member since:
2005-07-06

"Since you are not requred to use MOC to utilize the Qt libraries, it's by your own reasoning pure C++.
How is it pure C++, when it requires me to alter the way I work? with pure C++, you only need a text editor and the compiler. "

As I already have written, you do not have to use MOC. Nothing stops you from manually write the pure C++ code that MOC generates.

Edited 2010-09-24 14:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

axilmar Member since:
2006-03-20

As I already have written, you do not have to use MOC. Nothing stops you from manually write the pure C++ code that MOC generates.


From a practical point of view, what you say is impossible. No one is going to write the huge boilerplate code required for Qt to work manually.

So, Qt actually requires using the MOC.

Reply Parent Score: 2

siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Do you really call gcc manually always, or do you use makefiles? If you use makefiles, like any sane person, then your workflow is not altered by using MOC.

Of course, it sounds like you're one of those people who wants to take a dumbass stand on an issue of insignificance as you try to get people to convince you that what already makes sense (MOC) isn't unreasonable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

axilmar Member since:
2006-03-20

Do you really call gcc manually always, or do you use makefiles?


I don't use makefiles. Your assumption is wrong.

If you use makefiles, like any sane person, then your workflow is not altered by using MOC.


I let the IDE take that tedious job, like any sane person will do.

Of course, it sounds like you're one of those people who wants to take a dumbass stand on an issue of insignificance as you try to get people to convince you that what already makes sense (MOC) isn't unreasonable.


Wow there. A whole lot of invalid assumptions from your part.

Here is the deal...

Fact 1 : developing anything worthwhile without an IDE is near to impossible.

Fact 2 : the MOC works with only specific IDEs.

Fact 3 : if your favorite IDE is not supported by Qt, you are screwed.

So, in reality, the MOC is a real problem.

Reply Parent Score: 2