User forums > Using Code::Blocks
My pretty Qt!
Biplab:
--- Quote from: incorrect user on September 18, 2007, 09:29:15 am ---I just want to improve C::B for convinient Qt developing.
--- End quote ---
You're most welcome to do that. :)
--- Quote from: incorrect user on September 18, 2007, 09:29:15 am ---QtWorkbench is not the best way, cause we don't need a special plugin for using qmake, we can just define pre-build steps like this:
--- End quote ---
I hold no opinion about QtWorkbench plugin as I've never used it. But looking at other peoples' responses, it seems a number of peoples have found it useful.
--- Quote from: incorrect user on September 18, 2007, 09:29:15 am ---qmake -project
qmake
make Release
and proper targets (like ./release/my_program[.exe]), and be happy, but we need to define them for each project manually. So it's quite tiring!
If we make and use the user template, i wonder about useless of Qt wizard!
I think we must correct this situation.
--- End quote ---
I am among one of the peoples who take care of these wizards. But I don't use Qt, and I don't know how an app based on Qt is compiled (Apart from an Hello World! app). I can try the steps you've outlined and take care of the bugs present in the present Qt wizard. But don't expect an wizard which will setup everything you need to do Qt programming. It will mostly remain as a wizard which will setup a basic Hello World app.
Alternatively you can also make modifications to the wizard and post a patch. I'll put it in repo in due course.
Ceniza:
--- Quote from: incorrect user ---By the way, who knows why C::B is not based on Qt,but on wxWidgets???Is the last one better?
--- End quote ---
Quite simple: when Code::Blocks' development started Qt wasn't an option. One of the focuses of this IDE was, and still is, to be crossplatform. The problem is that only Qt 3 was available then, and the license it had for Windows wasn't helpful at all (only commercial license). When Qt 4 was released with its new license for Windows, Code::Blocks 1.0rc1 was about to be released. It would have been quite difficult and time consuming to modify the current implementation to make it use Qt; furthermore, it would have taken a good amount of time for the developers to become acquainted and productive with Qt too.
Qt is a very mature, complete and well designed toolkit. Personally, I consider it a lot better than wxWidgets, yet I'm more used to the latter. Actually, I never finished Qt's tutorial :P
As you can see, switching to Qt wouldn't be easy, and it would take a huge amount of time to do it. It would also imply forcing the developers to learn that other toolkit, or saying "bye-bye" to them. Just try to imagine what it would be like if a new announcement came out saying that RC3 would be delayed because we're migrating the application to another toolkit :lol: (no, we don't have a release date yet)
Code::Blocks will most likely continue using wxWidgets, but improving Qt support is highly appreciated :wink:
mandrav:
--- Quote from: Ceniza on September 18, 2007, 06:53:16 pm ---
--- Quote from: incorrect user ---By the way, who knows why C::B is not based on Qt,but on wxWidgets???Is the last one better?
--- End quote ---
Quite simple: when Code::Blocks' development started Qt wasn't an option. One of the focuses of this IDE was, and still is, to be crossplatform. The problem is that only Qt 3 was available then, and the license it had for Windows wasn't helpful at all (only commercial license).
--- End quote ---
Ceniza is right. Another reason was that Qt apps didn't use (don't know if they do now) the native toolkit for each platform which also made it a no-no.
incorrect user:
Thanks to everybody who answered on my request! Please, go on to post your thoughts about advanced Qt using and how the C::B can help you in it here. Let's discuss them together guys! ;)
Waiting on new ideas...
yop:
--- Quote from: mandrav on September 18, 2007, 07:04:02 pm ---... Qt apps didn't use (don't know if they do now) the native toolkit for each platform which also made it a no-no.
--- End quote ---
They still don't. Both Windows and Mac native toolkits are emulated (in Linux Qt *is* a "native" toolkit).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version