5 ms·
The only shame with Qt and C++ is the difficulty of providing bindings for other languages. It's just such an immense set of libraries to wrap by hand. You also
by photex 12y ago
The only shame with Qt and C++ is the difficulty of providing bindings for other languages. It's just such an immense set of libraries to wrap by hand. You also have to duplicate the work of moc.
- jnbiche 12y agoThis is an unfortunate reality for people building Qt bindings. I've always hoped that a coalition of Haskell, Nimrod, D, Rust, Lua, C#, Objective C, and other languages with easy C interop could come together and build a well-engineered C interface to Qt that was easy to maintain. There was QtC, but it fell apart a few years ago. There's also Smoke, but looking at an examples of its use[1], I can't help but think a well-designed C interface would be much easier to work with (disclaimer: I've never used Smoke). 1. http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Languages/Smoke http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Languages/Smoke