Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Kylix
From: Robert Jonsson (robert.jonsson_AT_dataductus.se)
Date: Fri May 09 2003 - 09:58:10 EEST
Hi,
>> Qt can also be developed using a WYSIWYG style editor called
>> QtDesigner. If you go ahead and compile QtDesigner with the KDE
>> classes, you can use the KDE widgets for that style of editing as well.
>>
>
>Qt designer looks cool but it does not have a compiler mode to compile
>and debug from it. It is not really a true IDE or RAD tool for
>development. It is very very close to Kylix though if they just had the
>ability to compile and develop within it.
No QT designer is just the "wizard", it needs to be accompanied by an
integrating environment.
>
>> Christian is right - Qt beats MFC hands down. MFC was a nightmare for
>MFC is the biggest pile of crap I ever used. I hate it 1000 times more
>than I hate GTK. At least GTK is free, so I won't rag on it. I just did
>not like the way GTK works at all. But MFC was just pure bullshit.
:-) heart warming
>
>When I mean RAD tools, you really had to use Borland C++ Builder.
>Imagine the ease of Visual Basic but with C++. That is how it was like.
>
>If you ever used Visual Studio .NET it's alot like the C# Windows forms
>stuff. Drag, drop, point, click, write code, compile, run, whoopee! Next
>part.
>
>I love GCC but all the kits are just too painful for using it for GUIs
>so far. Way too hard and awkward to use. I like the ease of Visual Basic
>but with the power of C++. Kylix/Borland Builder does this so nicely
>you'll flip when you use it and find out how powerful it is. And it
>isn't a mickey mouse solution either, it is really a very powerful API
>attached to it to do really advanced GUI work in C++ or Delphi.
Yeah, this has been the culprit for me many times also. I just don't have the
time/stamina/whatever to do something other than GUI-less tools without a
good IDE.
Professionally I write a little in Java right now, and I think the tools
available there are lightyears ahead of the current stock of tools for C/C++
(especially compared to the ones available in Linux). Java IDE's like
Idea(costs money) is just sooooooo complete.
As for Kylix, I did try it once but for some reason never got around to do
anything serious with it, I think it's because it is something of an outsider
in the opensource community...dunno..
I've done my fair share (more than that probably) of searching for good
development tools under Linux.
As for full IDE's there are currently three IDE's that I think deserves
mentioning.
http://anjuta.org
http://eclipse.org
http://kdevelop.org
Where I have used anjuta for a C based project and was very pleased with it
for a while, but it was still to buggy, so I stopped...
Eclipse is IBM's javabased super-all-in-one, now opensourced master-meta IDE
that will(and does) support everything and the kitchen sink ranging from
atoms to atombombs.
The C++ part of Eclipse is rather primitive as of yet though, and it doesn't
support any GUI tools. The java part is really cool though and I've used it
several times for smaller projects.
My personal favourite of the bunch is Kdevelop. I've done a C++ projekt in
Kdevelop a few years ago (no gui) and it worked rather well.
A new version of kdevelop is under heavy development, 3.0, this release seems,
on the drawing board to be extremely well equipped for C++ projects,
especially if you are doing gui-based development with QT or KDE toolkits. I
haven't tried it myself, but kdevelop IS supposed to integrate with QT
designer, I'm not sure how much is already finished though...
I've tried the alpha releases with varying degrees of success ;)
My testbench is to try and import MusE's source code and try to browse through
it and get it to compile from inside the IDE. Mostly works now :)
>
>What I am wondering about is the License to Kylix. Where is it? I am
>guessing that is why it has not been adopted more by OSS people.
You are talking about the 'free' version of Kylix right? I think all libraries
that you make with that are GPL, correct me if I'm wrong. And the founding
reason for that is probably because Kylix's GUI-toolkit is based on QT (!),
which in it's free form is GPL.
As for not so much adoption in the OSS community, I think it's simply because
it isn't true OSS by itself.
But I DO think it's a great tool, and Kylix DOES support C++ right?
If it fits your bill, go ahead and use it!
If you provide binaries for your projekt then people only need the
runtime-environment and, though big, isn't as big as the whole of Kylix :)
Personally I'm waiting for Kdevelops latest generation :-). Probably forever
;)...
Regards,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri May 09 2003 - 10:05:52 EEST