
Qt Creator 4.6 Beta Released - jjuhl
http://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/02/07/qt-creator-4-6-beta-released/
======
giancarlostoro
I've always loved Qt Creator, I sometimes wish it would have first class
citizen support for Python w/ Qt and other languages who bind Qt as well.
Another language I would of loved to see even if it doesn't directly target Qt
is D. Great IDE though, for the little C++ I've done, I've done it with Qt
using Qt Creator. Otherwise I use PySide which I wish had firsthand support
from them. Maybe Qt 5 could be a powerful Qt IDE that includes other languages
that integrate well enough with Qt itself.

~~~
fnl
While I love Python, I think all UIs I've ever seen that are based on it feel
pretty clumsy. The QML+JavaScript path Qt is taking makes more sense to me -
still snappy, but it unifies the web, app, and desktop worlds.

~~~
traverseda
There isn't really any UI code that follows the zen of python very well. Most
of the python zealots I know are kind of ambivalent about UI's in general.

What we would like

* Programmable, discoverable, UIs. I should be able to click a UI element and know what function it calls, or what method it uses.

* Keybindings support, and programmable/configurable keybindings

* A repl, with support for aforementioned

* Ncurses UI using same code base

Right now, we're a long way off from doing python UI's in a way that doesn't
feel hacky to the python zealots (like me).

~~~
badsectoracula
That last one is practically impossible for any but the most simple of
applications. It is much easier to reuse a (graphical) UI between desktop and
mobile than it is to reuse a GUI with a TUI. TUIs have core differences, from
using character cells for positioning and only allowing characters for
presenting the UI (i ignore stuff like sixel and regis since those aren't
supported by most terminals), to only having a very small selection for colors
(again ignoring things like terminals with 256 color support) and a very
limited input (often special keys do not work, mouse may or may not work,
etc). These things affect greatly the type of UIs you see in terminals - which
is also why even today you rarely see terminal applications use the richer UIs
that you could find in text based DOS applications in late 80s and early 90s.

But as far for the rest, FWIW, everything you describe seems to be a thing in
Blender's UI (including the ability to right click on every actionable element
and see what Python function it calls), which probably is kinda expected
considering that it was built around Python. Sadly the Blender UI is not
something you can use outside of Blender since it is tightly coupled with the
rest of the application. There are some attempts to recreate it as a reusable
library (e.g. Blendish), but they only go as far as to recreate the look.

~~~
traverseda
Blenders UI is the example at least one python zealot gives.

A tui can use the same keyboard shortcuts, a lot of the same structure, but
tender differently.

------
mankash666
The wish-lists in this thread are numerous, and gripes against C++ are many.
However, C++ & the multi-platform approach is very clearly working for Qt.

This is classic noise drowning out the signal - if existing or future paying
customers of Qt want something different, they'll let Qt know - after all
paying customers pay for support that buys them a direct line with the
builder(s).

------
vilya
QtCreator is brilliant, I just wish the Qt company would stop trying to hide
it away! It's getting harder and harder to find the download link on their
website.

~~~
wink
I hadn't even heard of it (well ok, wasn't doing C++, but still) but I'm
generally amazed since I started using it.

I don't miss IntelliJ really, and I've had it as my go-to IDE for like 7
years. Even the VIM mode works good enough.

------
0xFFC
Best C++ IDE ever. Clang code model does provide (about) the same level of
tooling in C++ with Java.

~~~
DerDangDerDang
People keep saying this about Qt Creator. I've used it as my main working IDE
for about 3 years now and I strongly disagree. I find it's not even a very
good piece of software, let alone the best IDE.

\- Find References on a function doesn't differentiate between overloads

\- no way to sort or filter warnings by type

\- Find results window doesn't horizontally scroll or wrap, it just truncates
(on mac)

\- mouse hover over a column separator preparing to drag, and the separator
pops away as a titlebar takes it's place - this is UX 101 - you don't move the
thing you know the user is trying to click!

\- can't restrict Find to a sub-project, top level project or nothing.

~~~
geezerjay
I would also add the following pet peeves:

\- Qt Creator doesn't do a good job detecting when a build scripts should be
refreshed even when a project is built, which causes compilation/linking
problems.

\- Qt creator doesn't support setting a centralized widget stylesheet to
define and update the stylesheet properties of any widget.

\- it only supports profiling in linux (valgrind)

\- its refactoring features are relaticely limited

\- support for static analysis via clang feels like a rush job

------
yoz-y
Qt Creator is my daily driver, and the steady stream of improvements is like
having Christmas several times a year. I particularly like how seamless the
integration with CMake is.

------
skrebbel
Somewhat off topic, but I'm increasingly finding that Qt is the last remaining
reason to use C++. Qt is amazing, but C++ isn't a very productive language to
code in, even if you're good at it. OS-less microcontroller stuff is probably
better done with plain C, and everything else (games, system programming,
embedded programming with an OS, etc) has mature and better options available
such as Rust, Go, Nim, and (particularly for gamedev) C#.

But none of those languages have Qt. Of course, there's stuff like PyQt which
is nice, but it's not got the status that C++ has in Qt land. Really what I'd
love is if Qt would add first-class support for one of those newer languages.
Rust maybe? I reckon it's a enormous, maybe simply unfeasible undertaking, but
first-class Rust support, so I can fire up Qt Creator and start coding Qt apps
in Rust would be _fantastic_. It would suddenly increase the usefulness of
Rust by enormous amounts and it would keep Qt relevant.

Does anyone know if the Qt people are evaluating other languages? Are they
worried, commercially, about C++'s demise?

~~~
snarfy
> and everything else (games, system programming, embedded programming with an
> OS, etc) has mature and better options available such as Rust, Go, Nim, and
> (particularly for gamedev) C#.

None of the options you mention, other than possibly Rust,is actually
appropriate for game engines, systems programming, or embedded, due to the
garbage collector. There are still plenty of good reasons to use C++, not just
Qt.

~~~
ronjouch
When mentioning C# _" for gamedev"_, OP was probably talking about games
_business logic_. The Unity core _engine_ may be C++ (and assembly and
shaders), but many Unity users / developers seem to do well with C# game logic
/ scripting.

EDIT question to Unity devs more experienced than I am: how frequent is it to
"escape hatch" from C# to C++ game logic, in your experience? In what kind of
game?

~~~
m_t
From my experience, not that frequent.

Had the occasion to watch a conference from a Dev in my company that would get
rid of a lot of the overhead added by the Mono Behaviour in Unity. Getting
better performances at the cost of less usability. In that case, one wonder
why event bother using Unity?

------
lultimouomo
You can get more info directly from the source:
[http://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/02/07/qt-creator-4-6-beta-
releas...](http://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/02/07/qt-creator-4-6-beta-released/)

