Thread: Say NO! to Qt-based Maemo!
View Single Post
Joorin is offline Joorin
2010-04-20 , 13:11
Posts: 726 | Thanked: 345 times | Joined on Apr 2010 @ Sweden
#43
Originally Posted by w00t View Post
...

That is, if there was some kind of a sinister plot to take Qt in directions that the community wasn't happy with, I think the community would soon take things their own direction again. Obviously, this isn't something that the controlling company would be looking to start, so I don't see this as too high a risk.

...

There are other technical aspects of some of the posts here that I don't think are quite on for similar reasons, like "moc being a tie-in to Qt" which is just stupid - obviously, if you use a platform, you're tied to it - try using a Gtk+ app without using Gtk+.

...

At the end of the day, if you're not happy with the situation as it is, get involved. Help develop Qt, help shape the tools, help make things happen - don't sit in an armchair and paint the bikeshed.
Taking into account how few of the members of the Maemo community actually are developers of any shape and kind, questions about changes in the basic workings of the system will always end up a tad frantic. To me, this thread has more of that in it (without forgetting that OP and you actually are developers) than actual technical concerns in regards to how it will affect the device.

Regarding MOC, I do wonder what the equivalent tool when developing GTK+ applications is. I develop GTK+ applications without describing the GUI of my application in some metalanguage so equating "using MOC to develop Qt applications" to "using GTK+ (the library and headers) to develop and run GTK+ applications" comes across as a tad off target. Qt brings MOC to the table together with libraries and headers.

This leads to two of my actual concerns: code size and performance. The N900 is limited as it is (without serious tinkering) and to more or less direct much of the future development along a line with bigger binaries that depend on a larger application stack might not be the best.

Of course this has to be weighed against the potential ease in developing or porting new applications but to just brush it over with "C sucks, C++ rocks" as I've seen in other threads here is to, in my opinion, overlook some of the real consequences.

Regarding armchair shed painting, I agree. Getting involved is the best thing but it's not an option but for a select few. As you yourself state later on in the thread, the quality you need to be able to produce is proportional to how important the component is.