Qt ready to replace MFC as favorite C++ framework [modified]
-
I agree. I have used WTL on several projects, and immediately felt comfortable with it (no surprise, since WTL started out as a lightweight alternative to MFC).
Best wishes, Hans
[CodeProject Forum Guidelines] [How To Ask A Question] [My Articles]
We've moved to it completely now..the only "live" project I've got that still uses it is ResOrg, and even that has a WTL only port underway. :-D
Anna :rose: Having a bad bug day? Tech Blog | Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
We've moved to it completely now..the only "live" project I've got that still uses it is ResOrg, and even that has a WTL only port underway. :-D
Anna :rose: Having a bad bug day? Tech Blog | Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
I'd like to hear more about that. Maybe you could keep notes and do a WTL porting article? :)
Best wishes, Hans
[CodeProject Forum Guidelines] [How To Ask A Question] [My Articles]
-
I'd like to hear more about that. Maybe you could keep notes and do a WTL porting article? :)
Best wishes, Hans
[CodeProject Forum Guidelines] [How To Ask A Question] [My Articles]
That's an interesting idea. I suspect we're a bit too far along with it now to make it worthwhile, though! What we've done so far is a) develop most of the add-in and WTL framework bits we need in another product (Visual Lint in this case - the Task Dialog support etc. was all tried out there first), and b) port classes on an "as required" basis from MFC to WTL. The only really sticky bit has been the doc-view stuff the original design was based around - for that we've used a WTL Doc-View implementation we found here to simplify the port. Porting individual UI classes from MFC to WTL is usually pretty straightforward, in my experience; porting a whole project is a bit trickier because you need a critical mass of the work completed to get any of it working!
Anna :rose: Having a bad bug day? Tech Blog | Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
Nokia has announced plans to make the open source Qt toolkit available under GNU's Lesser General Public License (LGPL), alongside the existing GPL and commercial licensing options. This change could significantly boost Qt adoption, redefine the economics of cross-platform programming, and dramatically reshape the landscape of commercial application development using C++. Now the question is will Microsoft take some time to Improve MFC for Windows. Although as VS2008 Service pack Microsoft as tried to Improve MFC. But Still if I compare QT with MFC , QT is much much batter than MFC both in design and Functionality and QT is much more updated for modern programming.Anyone who has used QT will be able to tell where MFC stand against QT. QT is better then MFC and can run on nearly any platform this make it a Big challenge for MFC. For most of my career I have worked on MFC. But if MFC remains a dead project QT will be the obvious choice. Main problem for QT was its license. But now that problem is solved. I near future if Microsoft did not improve MFC most of the C++ programmer will switch to QT. Want to know your comment do U feel Microsoft will respond to QT challenge. -------------------- In addition to adopting the LGPL license for Qt, Nokia will also be completely changing Qt development model to make it more inclusive and transparent. The source code will be moved to a publicly-accessible Git repository so that the latest changes will always be visible.
Sudhir Mangla http://tips.DevelopersVoice.com (Technical Tips and Tricks) http://Programmerworld.net (Free books and source code) http://Faq.Programmerworld.net (FAQ and Tips for programmers)
http://health.Programmerworld.net (Health tips)modified on Monday, January 26, 2009 10:53 AM
Sudhir Mangla wrote:
I near future if Microsoft did not improve MFC most of the C++ programmer will switch to QT.
this will never happen
-
Where is John Cardinal when you need him? I was hoping to see his "people still use C++ to develop UIs?" retort! :rolleyes:
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
pseudonym67 wrote:
MFC is nothing more than an out of date framework that has been passed by along with the shift to .net languages.
I thought C++ had already been replaced by Java. 10 years ago.
-
I can second that. Among the ISVs I've met at ESWC, there seems to be about a 50/50 split between C++ and Delphi. Very occasionally I'll come aross one using .NET or Java (for example) but they're definitely in the margins. FWIW the biggest issues with .NET for ISVs I know of are a) security of the compiled executable (obfuscation gets you only so far) and b) the lack of a small non-install (e.g. statically linked) reddistributable framework runtime.
Anna :rose: Having a bad bug day? Tech Blog | Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
You forgot the joke icon.
Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.
Trollslayer wrote:
You forgot the joke icon.
Thought that was obvious for everyone being in the software development field for a while ;)
-
A 2MB installer that needs a 200MB runtime?
Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.
Got it in one. :doh: .NET is great for enterprise, intranet, etc. It's not so well suited for small ISVs for this reason and security in particular.
Anna :rose: Having a bad bug day? Tech Blog | Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
Nokia has announced plans to make the open source Qt toolkit available under GNU's Lesser General Public License (LGPL), alongside the existing GPL and commercial licensing options. This change could significantly boost Qt adoption, redefine the economics of cross-platform programming, and dramatically reshape the landscape of commercial application development using C++. Now the question is will Microsoft take some time to Improve MFC for Windows. Although as VS2008 Service pack Microsoft as tried to Improve MFC. But Still if I compare QT with MFC , QT is much much batter than MFC both in design and Functionality and QT is much more updated for modern programming.Anyone who has used QT will be able to tell where MFC stand against QT. QT is better then MFC and can run on nearly any platform this make it a Big challenge for MFC. For most of my career I have worked on MFC. But if MFC remains a dead project QT will be the obvious choice. Main problem for QT was its license. But now that problem is solved. I near future if Microsoft did not improve MFC most of the C++ programmer will switch to QT. Want to know your comment do U feel Microsoft will respond to QT challenge. -------------------- In addition to adopting the LGPL license for Qt, Nokia will also be completely changing Qt development model to make it more inclusive and transparent. The source code will be moved to a publicly-accessible Git repository so that the latest changes will always be visible.
Sudhir Mangla http://tips.DevelopersVoice.com (Technical Tips and Tricks) http://Programmerworld.net (Free books and source code) http://Faq.Programmerworld.net (FAQ and Tips for programmers)
http://health.Programmerworld.net (Health tips)modified on Monday, January 26, 2009 10:53 AM
I used to program in Windows with MFC, but using C# and .NET and Windows Forms is a breeze; I've made the switch for good :)
Sincerely Yours, Brian Hart
-
We've moved to it completely now..the only "live" project I've got that still uses it is ResOrg, and even that has a WTL only port underway. :-D
Anna :rose: Having a bad bug day? Tech Blog | Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
I'd have to second the WTL comments. I've used it off and on for 5+ years now. The 3 main Win32 projects I'm currently responsible for partly use it (that's one of the best things about it, it's fast and efficient and can easily be mixed/added to existing Win32/MFC/ATL code) and the 4th project which I wrote from scratch in ATL/WTL was very easy going. It's well worth a look. Anna-Jayne's product "Visual Lint" (which is brill I must add!), uses it. Mike
-
Nokia has announced plans to make the open source Qt toolkit available under GNU's Lesser General Public License (LGPL), alongside the existing GPL and commercial licensing options. This change could significantly boost Qt adoption, redefine the economics of cross-platform programming, and dramatically reshape the landscape of commercial application development using C++. Now the question is will Microsoft take some time to Improve MFC for Windows. Although as VS2008 Service pack Microsoft as tried to Improve MFC. But Still if I compare QT with MFC , QT is much much batter than MFC both in design and Functionality and QT is much more updated for modern programming.Anyone who has used QT will be able to tell where MFC stand against QT. QT is better then MFC and can run on nearly any platform this make it a Big challenge for MFC. For most of my career I have worked on MFC. But if MFC remains a dead project QT will be the obvious choice. Main problem for QT was its license. But now that problem is solved. I near future if Microsoft did not improve MFC most of the C++ programmer will switch to QT. Want to know your comment do U feel Microsoft will respond to QT challenge. -------------------- In addition to adopting the LGPL license for Qt, Nokia will also be completely changing Qt development model to make it more inclusive and transparent. The source code will be moved to a publicly-accessible Git repository so that the latest changes will always be visible.
Sudhir Mangla http://tips.DevelopersVoice.com (Technical Tips and Tricks) http://Programmerworld.net (Free books and source code) http://Faq.Programmerworld.net (FAQ and Tips for programmers)
http://health.Programmerworld.net (Health tips)modified on Monday, January 26, 2009 10:53 AM
People are still coding in C++? :) From my perspective you might as well be talking about hand cranks being superseded by electric starters on Model T's.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
-
People are still coding in C++? :) From my perspective you might as well be talking about hand cranks being superseded by electric starters on Model T's.
"It's so simple to be wise. Just think of something stupid to say and then don't say it." -Sam Levenson
John C wrote:
People are still coding in C++?
Some of us still write programs that push the current hardware to its limits, need several GB of memory and fast disk arrays to operate...
John
-
Nokia has announced plans to make the open source Qt toolkit available under GNU's Lesser General Public License (LGPL), alongside the existing GPL and commercial licensing options. This change could significantly boost Qt adoption, redefine the economics of cross-platform programming, and dramatically reshape the landscape of commercial application development using C++. Now the question is will Microsoft take some time to Improve MFC for Windows. Although as VS2008 Service pack Microsoft as tried to Improve MFC. But Still if I compare QT with MFC , QT is much much batter than MFC both in design and Functionality and QT is much more updated for modern programming.Anyone who has used QT will be able to tell where MFC stand against QT. QT is better then MFC and can run on nearly any platform this make it a Big challenge for MFC. For most of my career I have worked on MFC. But if MFC remains a dead project QT will be the obvious choice. Main problem for QT was its license. But now that problem is solved. I near future if Microsoft did not improve MFC most of the C++ programmer will switch to QT. Want to know your comment do U feel Microsoft will respond to QT challenge. -------------------- In addition to adopting the LGPL license for Qt, Nokia will also be completely changing Qt development model to make it more inclusive and transparent. The source code will be moved to a publicly-accessible Git repository so that the latest changes will always be visible.
Sudhir Mangla http://tips.DevelopersVoice.com (Technical Tips and Tricks) http://Programmerworld.net (Free books and source code) http://Faq.Programmerworld.net (FAQ and Tips for programmers)
http://health.Programmerworld.net (Health tips)modified on Monday, January 26, 2009 10:53 AM
Actually if you like Qt, you should check out the VCF, at least for Windows programming. It's a got many of the same features and a number of them that Qt doesn't. Plus it's got an even less restrictive license (BSD).
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog Laugh: Dercas si Mreps Yreve
-
I used to program in Windows with MFC, but using C# and .NET and Windows Forms is a breeze; I've made the switch for good :)
Sincerely Yours, Brian Hart
Brian C. Hart, Ph.D. wrote:
but using C# and .NET and Windows Forms is a breeze; I've made the switch for good
So is Delphi and classic VB. Why didn't you make the switch in 1995?
-
John C wrote:
People are still coding in C++?
Some of us still write programs that push the current hardware to its limits, need several GB of memory and fast disk arrays to operate...
John
Frankly, I stopped arguing with VB'ers :)
-
Sudhir Mangla wrote:
I near future if Microsoft did not improve MFC most of the C++ programmer will switch to QT.
this will never happen
Actually MS is nearly dead in Supporting MFC and WTL but since Nokia acquire QT it is try to posh QT to mass. As a first step they remove the main hurdle i.e QT license. They are also developing Free IDE for QT. QT can now be used for commercial projects without paying any fees. QT is going open source way but Nokia still putting its weight behind it. MS has 2 problems MAC market share is improving every year and QT is best solution for making same code run on both Windows and MAC. and U know QT is a quality library. I don't see any reason why ppl wound switch to QT. QT is up to date library. MFC was last major update was in 1998. It 10 years!
Sudhir Mangla http://tips.DevelopersVoice.com (Technical Tips and Tricks) http://Programmerworld.net (Free books and source code) http://Faq.Programmerworld.net (FAQ and Tips for programmers)
http://health.Programmerworld.net (Health tips) -
Actually if you like Qt, you should check out the VCF, at least for Windows programming. It's a got many of the same features and a number of them that Qt doesn't. Plus it's got an even less restrictive license (BSD).
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog Laugh: Dercas si Mreps Yreve
Well, I tried VCF and found it interesting. I will explore it more when I get time. Good work :)
Navaneeth How to use google | Ask smart questions
-
Actually MS is nearly dead in Supporting MFC and WTL but since Nokia acquire QT it is try to posh QT to mass. As a first step they remove the main hurdle i.e QT license. They are also developing Free IDE for QT. QT can now be used for commercial projects without paying any fees. QT is going open source way but Nokia still putting its weight behind it. MS has 2 problems MAC market share is improving every year and QT is best solution for making same code run on both Windows and MAC. and U know QT is a quality library. I don't see any reason why ppl wound switch to QT. QT is up to date library. MFC was last major update was in 1998. It 10 years!
Sudhir Mangla http://tips.DevelopersVoice.com (Technical Tips and Tricks) http://Programmerworld.net (Free books and source code) http://Faq.Programmerworld.net (FAQ and Tips for programmers)
http://health.Programmerworld.net (Health tips)Sudhir Mangla wrote:
MFC was last major update was in 1998
and yet it still works fine.
-
pseudonym67 wrote:
the shoddy gui implementation and the fact that if you actually want to develop any kind of serious application you pretty much have to write it out yourself.
WHAT? I mean there is so much more in Qt than MFC. To me it is so much easier writing applications in Qt because I do not have to extend the library because of a missing but important feature. Several of these important features are the layouts, the dynamic windows, dynamic events, the and the built-in grid control. [EDIT]And before every one thinks I have never used MFC, I have actually written >500K lines of MFC code over the last 12 or so years. And about 10K lines in Qt. I am totally amazed on how much easier to program with Qt versus MFC. [/EDIT]
John
modified on Saturday, January 24, 2009 10:10 AM
John M. Drescher wrote:
I have never used MFC, I have actually written >500K lines of MFC code
So, that's one small MFC utility class. ;P
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
