|
CListCtrl still holding it's own within developer methodologies! Maybe there should be a CListCtrl pattern.
|
|
|
|
|
CListCtrl has a very long tradition in all surveys.
But I cannot figure out how did it started.
Any idea?
2 bugs found.
> recompile ...
65534 bugs found.
|
|
|
|
|
Years ago the site design was different and many novice users searching for articles/help typed their search term into the empty field of the survey because they did not recognize the actual search field in the first place. And one very common search term was "CListCtrl".
|
|
|
|
|
Down with Silverlight
Sincerely Yours,
Brian Hart
|
|
|
|
|
I am currently building a Windows desktop application where the core application is completely written in HTML/JavaScript/CSS. I built a custom browser (based on the open source Arora browser that uses QT) and a custom NPAPI plugin to provide access to the machine (e.g. file system, databases, registry). The NPAPI is generic and could be applied to any future GUI app. The browser itself just provides a frame. I think if I ever have to build another GUI app this is the way I'd do it unless there was a specific requirement that eliminated this path.
|
|
|
|
|
Why would you have bothered with this when you have the MSHTML libraries on the system? I'm not trying to knock your idea, I'm genuinely curious. I've done this kind of thing for some of our apps at work, so I'm curious why re-invent the wheel?
|
|
|
|
|
Using the MSHTML control was considered but rejected because of the inconsistent availability across PC's (not availability of the control, but version of the control - IE6,7,8,9). Security was a concern and IE was frowned upon for that. The application is heavy on Javascript and IE has one of the slowest Javascript engine. Also, IE's support for CSS, HTML5 capabilities like local storage & app caching is non existent. Delivering new client-side API capabilities with the MSHTML control means deploying a new app (more-or-less) while a Webkit browser can accept standard NPAPI plugins which can be deployed as files in a directory. That makes in-place upgrades easier and faster. WE chose to use the Arora browser but if I did it over again I'd use a custom build of the Chromium browser. There are some quirks in QT's implementation of Webkit, but they aren't too bad. Oh yeah, this method means that a future Mac version (hopefully not) would be a fairly direct path as all of the client side code is C++ for the NPAPI plugin and C++/QT for the browser itself.
One of the primary design objectives was to deliver the "chrome" of the app completely in HTML/CSS/JS so that the client can make changes to the app server side without ever deploying the app again. With HTML app caching, this works well. Another key requirement was that the NPAPI plugin provides OLE automation capabilities (specifically for things like shell commands) and those events needed to be passed back to Javascript functions which was near impossible with MSHTML. Probably the biggest factor in going this route was that the clients on-staff developers (I'm a contractor on this) can focus their energy on web development and web technologies and not have to deal with client-side issues, installer complexities, etc. I really like the way the product is coming together and thanks to the open-source requirement of the NPAPI plugin, I plan to write an article on it sometime in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
The question asks what "technologies" yet the list contains VB6, Java and Delphi, which are languages, not technologies. If these are on the list, then where is C# or C++?
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you. they are languages. someone replied CListCtrl in other text answer.
it's so fun, how can CListCtrl be technologies.
TRACE( "[] by FnWinter " );
|
|
|
|
|
CListCtrl is long running inside joke
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
|
VB forms (Original codename Thunder) is a distinct technology.
|
|
|
|
|
They were included to make those programmers feel like what they do matters.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
No other api has anything on Qt.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you sure *no* other API does? 
|
|
|
|
|
Yup I do know that. Care to prove me wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, but I do know a thing or two about creating frameworks 
|
|
|
|
|
Hehe try to build one better than Qt and that's cross platform and runs on hardware devices like phones, cars, etc then you'll know how to create one  . Don't take it the wrong way or anything. But wasting time writing your own gui is just a waste of time. *shrugs*
|
|
|
|
|
You're right! What a complete idiot I was! I see the light now. Thanks so much for providing such well a thought out and enlightened response! I really do see now that Qt is better than everything else out there! Woot! I can't wait to write a Qt app to run on my linux powered toaster - awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
While I respect your zeal (kind of), I must respectfully disagree. Qt is a bad application framework for the following reasons:
1. It is not exception-safe[^] which was acceptable in 1991, but not in 2011.
2. Qt uses non-standard C++ extensions via a separate tool (moc) without any valid reason. There are many standard-compliant implementations of signals and slots that are superior to the Qt's, such as Boost.Signals[^]
3. GUIs developed with Qt look fine on Linux/KDE, substandard on Windows and on Mac - well try convincing a Mac fan to use a Qt application if you can
4. Qt duplicates many features of the C++ Standard Library without any real need.
5. Qt design is typical for the 1990s style of OOP design. Modern C++ looks very different than Qt - it avoids raw pointers, uses RAII, STL and exceptions. Qt looks like a half-baked Java.
In conclusion, I strongly advise against using Qt. If you don't like C++, just switch to Java or C# instead. Qt is not C++.
|
|
|
|
|
Who cares about exceptions? Qt uses return error codes. Exceptions just bloat code.
Qt's signals/slots predate all of those. If Qt uses Boost, it would require depending on Boost release cycles and Boost doesn't isn't even binary compatible nor source compatible. Have you ever used Qt's meta object system to even complain about it?
I've used Qt on Mac and Windows and I can't tell a damn difference between the two. Well a few little problems on Mac but nothing the average user will care about. You forgot recently that Qt actually uses the platforms native api to render it. On Mac Qt uses the native widgets. On Windows they use the uxtheme api.
Qt was done in 1991 and the C++ was standardised in 1998. also Qt still tends to support a lot more systems that don't have proper STL support or even lacks some of it which Qt requires which requires Qt to use it's own containers, which are also very compatible with STL. Also if you haven't noticed, there are syntax style issues that don't match Qt's style convention, STL didn't provide a hash until C++0x which still isn't widely supported by compilers. Have you ever seen how bloody painful STL is to work with? I rather use Qt's containers which give me extra functionality that STL's containers don't provide.
How is it 1990's style of OOP? Please xplain this to me? What you rather it be empty and featureless like all the other gui toolkits like Gtkmm, wxWidgets (even wxWidgets has it's own C++ containers, but I don't hear anyone bitching about that?). I guess you prefer everything done in a sh*tty MFC/wxWidgets clone with macro hell, ugly hungarian notation, featureless, only works on one OS, support that sucks, hard to use and keep building on?
Yeah I guess Windows users love to complain about anything and everything. I guess that's what you are saying basically right? You prefer requiring billions of dependencies on other libraries and half broken apis with multiple different style conventions just because you think it will be bad.
If Qt is so bad, then why is it the most toolkit used in C++ for Scientific applications, in Hollywood movies, in car embedded devices, cell phones and I can continue to go on and on.
So please enlighten me troll how is Qt not C++. I guess it's in Javascript or COBOL right?
|
|
|
|
|
xComaWhitex wrote: please enlighten me troll
I'll continue this discussion when you grow up and learn your manners. In the meantime, I have reported your post as offensive. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Was that really necessary? You could see from his previous messages that Nemanja is a respected member of this community.
|
|
|
|
|
xComaWhitex wrote: So please enlighten me troll
That's just not called for. Just because somebody chooses to have a different opinion to you does not entitle you to be offensive to them. That is the height of bad manners, and is not going to win you any arguments because you have deigned to start name calling.
|
|
|
|
|
Well it's hard to tell serious people from those that just troll. If he disagree that his opinion. Just wasting time using something else. xD
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
