View Single Post
w00t's Avatar
Posts: 1,055 | Thanked: 4,107 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Norway
#61
Originally Posted by puelocesar View Post
You can think whatever you want. In my opinion, and you can find several examples illustrating that, a software that doesn't attend the user needs is irrelevant, no matter how well engineered it is.
And where am I saying that they shouldn't attend to user needs, pray tell? *ALL* my post says is that *IF* DUI (or anything else) is needed, it shouldn't duplicate existing work (like QML+QtAnimation), and it should be properly designed. So far, from what I've seen, and from reading the notes of a few other people who have looked into DUI, it doesn't look all that fantastic, as well as looking remarkably foreign compared to the *rest* of Qt.

Originally Posted by puelocesar View Post
Of course I'm not saying things shouldn't be bad engineered, don't misuse my words, and again, I still doesn't see how an abstraction layer can be so harmful. KDE uses one the same way and there's no one pointing fingers at them.
DING DING DING! So we agree then?

Let me repeat myself:

Originally Posted by w00t
I'm not saying that means should be dictated by a lowest common denominator, and that there is absolutely no need for DUI simply because it doesn't exist - but as far as I can tell from what I've read up on it, there isn't any need for it because QtAnimation and QML and other similar technologies are already working towards the goals it seems to want to achieve, in a more agnostic, abstract fashion.
__________________
i'm a Qt expert and former Jolla sailor (forever sailing, in spirit).
if you like, read more about me.
if you find me entertaining, or useful, thank me. if you don't, then tell me why.

Last edited by w00t; 2009-12-01 at 16:00. Reason: clarifying a few terms
 

The Following User Says Thank You to w00t For This Useful Post: