On 01.03.06 13:43:31, otortos@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I also believe that the changes in designer were a mistake ( the same Anton's
> arguments )
Grab an IDE and you get all you want, without the bugs.
> In a developers' meeting that we had a few years ago here in my country, we
> were speaking about the need of a program as visual basic in linux.
We have Basic and AFAIK also some support for VB on linux. Or do you
mean the VB IDE? Than that is also called Visual Studio and there are at
least 2 relatively good C++ IDE's for Linux: KDevelop and eclipse/CDT.
Both have problems, but both are better IDE's than Qt3-designer ever
> When we knew of QT, we all think that it was a real competition against
I don't know enough about VB (only rumours) to make a real comment here,
but what has the programming language to do with the application
framework or the IDE?
> Sadly the changes realized in designer make it less attractive.
I think it's more attractive to use, especially if it is true that it
got more stable. Also a real C++-capable editor is much more attractive
than the qt-editor was.
However: If you think Qt3 designer is better, use it. Qt3 will be around
for quite some time I think so no need to worry about the next months
You'll never see all the places, or read all the books, but fortunately,
they're not all recommended.
To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"unsubscribe" in the subject or the body.
List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/