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 442537
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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

siride Member since:
2006-01-02

"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.
"
What IDE do you use, then? I know Visual Studio, Qt Creator, KDevelop all support MOC. You can probably hack it into the build system of any other IDE unless it's a total piece of shit.

"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.
"
True in many cases, but not all. Depends on the language and platform.

Fact 2 : the MOC works with only specific IDEs.

Not true. If the IDE supports any type of custom building at all, then you can have it shell out to MOC.

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

Then use an IDE for Qt. This isn't hard. Use the right tool for the job. Qt already supports all the major IDEs. If you want to use some backwater IDE that nobody knows about, you must deal with the fact that a lot of things won't work with it. Sorry.

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

Not for people who don't have ridiculous personal requirements about their workflow.

Reply Parent Score: 2

axilmar Member since:
2006-03-20

What IDE do you use, then? I know Visual Studio, Qt Creator, KDevelop


I use Visual Studio...right now, VS is supported, but not some years ago.

What about XEmacs? I know you can hack XEmacs to support it, but still, it's extra work, someone has to do it.

Not for people who don't have ridiculous personal requirements about their workflow.


It's not a ridiculous requirement to not have to do more work than it should be required.

Reply Parent Score: 2