kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Manveru <manveru@...>]

--00032555b2a272a4e6047fdd1a81 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2010/2/18 Rok Markovi=C4=8D <rok@...>

>
>
> Hi
>
> In our company we Qt for almost 5 years now. We have never been
> dissapointed
> by it. I do not want to make any advertisment, but please take a look at
> the
> documentation of QGraphicsScene, QGraphicsItem,.... IMHO this are very we=
ll
>
> written classes from which others could learn. Also Qt uses its own
> renderer.
> Practice has shown that it is very fast and efficient too. (smooth zoomin=
g
> of
> couple of thousand items). (Win and linux).
>
> There was already an idea to switch from wxWidgets to Qt. Is there any
> estimate of the time needed for conversion?
>
> Please note that I am just making my opinion!
>
I am not a KiCad expert here, but I was looking into code... and I know
differences of writing apps in wxWidgets and Qt, and for me, this is
impossible to do that. No one can handle that.

By term "impossible" I means only conversion of the code for new framework.
KiCad code has weak abstraction layer and depends on wxWidgets library in
many more-less surprising places... and what is most important is not fully
object-oriented.

Qt is stronger and better aligned in object world than wxWidgets I think. S=
o
the only options for moving to Qt is to rewriting KiCad from scratch keepin=
g
new framework on mind, correcting some design issues. This task is possible=
,
the problem is manforce needed for such heavy job.

But we should get know about others' opinion.

--=20
Manveru
jabber: manveru@...
gg: 1624001
http://www.manveru.pl
 --00032555b2a272a4e6047fdd1a81 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2010/2/18 Rok Markovi=C4=8D <span dir=3D=
"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:rok@...";>rok@...</a>&gt;</span>=
<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(2=
04, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">













<div style=3D"background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<span>=C2=A0</span>


<div>
<div>


<div>
=20=20=20=20=20=20
=20=20=20=20=20=20
<p>Hi<br>
<br>
In our company we Qt for almost 5 years now. We have never been dissapointe=
d <br>
by it. I do not want to make any advertisment, but please take a look at th=
e <br>
documentation of QGraphicsScene, QGraphicsItem,.... IMHO this are very well=
<br>
written classes from which others could learn. Also Qt uses its own rendere=
r. <br>
Practice has shown that it is very fast and efficient too. (smooth zooming =
of <br>
couple of thousand items). (Win and linux).<br>
<br>
There was already an idea to switch from wxWidgets to Qt. Is there any <br>
estimate of the time needed for conversion?<br>
<br>
Please note that I am just making my opinion!<br>
</p></div></div></div></div>



=20=20






</blockquote></div>I am not a KiCad expert here, but I was looking into cod=
e... and I know differences of writing apps in wxWidgets and Qt, and for me=
, this is impossible to do that. No one can handle that.<br><br>By term &qu=
ot;impossible&quot; I means only conversion of the code for new framework. =
KiCad code has weak abstraction layer and depends on wxWidgets library in m=
any more-less surprising places... and what is most important is not fully =
object-oriented.<br>
<br>Qt is stronger and better aligned in object world than wxWidgets I thin=
k. So the only options for moving to Qt is to rewriting KiCad from scratch =
keeping new framework on mind, correcting some design issues. This task is =
possible, the problem is manforce needed for such heavy job.<br>
<br>But we should get know about others&#39; opinion.<br clear=3D"all"><br>=
-- <br>Manveru<br>jabber: <a href=3D"mailto:manveru@...";>manveru@man=
veru.pl</a><br> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 gg: 1624001<br> =C2=A0 <a href=3D"http://www.=
manveru.pl">http://www.manveru.pl</a><br>

 --00032555b2a272a4e6047fdd1a81--