
Qt Creator 4.3.0 released - pyprism
https://blog.qt.io/blog/2017/05/24/qt-creator-4-3-0-released/
======
fiftyacorn
Qt is very underrated - its pretty easy to get started, works cross platform
and is stable in my experience

~~~
swah
I will use C# instead of Qt in a next project because we're a university and
getting a license would be a PITA..

~~~
blub
Universities of all places should prefer open source tools and should release
their projects as open source.

Licensing sounds like an excuse to justify your choice.

~~~
swah
We're building this for a company. What I mean is that its a big bureocracy to
justify buying stuff.

~~~
dkersten
Last time I checked, Qt was GPL/LGPL/Commercial. You can use the LGPL license
just fine as long as you statically link the so/dll files.

I do understand not wanting to have to verify/check your obligations, of
course. Still, Qt is a fantastic piece of software and a number of companies
that I know of use the LGPL version just fine.

~~~
gpderetta
you mean as long as you do _dynamicall_ link?

~~~
iamcreasy
Yes, as long as you do dynamic linking Qt is free to use.

------
dmytroi
Glad to see one of the best C++ IDE's getting even better. The best part of
it: even after all this years of active development and improvements it still
feels very lightweight, it's more like sublime in terms of speed, when other
comparable (by features) IDE's are feeling very heavy and bulky (like Visual
Studio for example).

The only thing I would love to dream of is to Qt Creator have a better stand-
alone support, now it's completely and fully integrated with Qt ecosystem, and
that's really nice if you use Qt, but when I'm trying to convince my co-
workers to give it a try, the getting on-board curve is a bit too much. Though
this being said: it become much better in last years.

~~~
problems
It's interesting, I used Qt Creator for a few years, overall I quite enjoyed
it, the refactoring features builtin to it were much better than the VS
builtin ones IMO. The code completion was brutally slow sometimes though,
especially if using the Clang code model which basically maxed a core for over
a minute every time I saved a file. In the end I switched to VS and Resharper
C++ for the performance gain there and coworkers comfort.

I tend to use includes everywhere and only minimal forward declarations when
required - this might be the source of the problem, but many modern C++
standards I've seen actually encourage that as best practice and discourage
use of forward declarations. VS is able to keep up with that and Qt Creator
just isn't. I find maintaining forward declarations a pain in the ass. See
[https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Forward_De...](https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Forward_Declarations)
for example.

~~~
pjmlp
Google style guide is well known in C++ circles for not being that good of a
style guide, other than taming the minions of employees at chocolate factory.

It used to be quite behind what is considered best practices in modern C++.

~~~
problems
I've heard this and avoid it in many places, but I think their arguments are
sound here. The maintenance effort and unexpected rebuilds needed to upkeep
forward declarations is something I'm not interested in doing.

I'm not going to change my coding style because Qt Creator is broken,
switching IDEs makes much more sense.

Maybe I'm wrong and I've just been made horribly lazy by writing too much C#,
Python and JS, maybe this is some pretty horrible technical debt, but
hopefully this will all go away once the planned C++17 modules system is
introduced. It's one of my biggest annoyances with the language to date.

~~~
pjmlp
> Maybe I'm wrong and I've just been made horribly lazy by writing too much
> C#, Python and JS, ....

I know the feeling.

Nowadays I only use C++ to write libraries for Java/.NET/Android/UWP, that I
have full control over.

When I see C++ code written in enterprise projects, frozen in pre-C++98, the
code looks quite different, it is a continuous education process to try to
convince devs to move forward, think Python 2 vs Python 3.

I also miss modules, but at least I can play with them on VC++ 2017.

------
0xFFC
I have said this in reddit, I am saying this again here because I feel if I
don't I haven't paid my debt to QtCreator, especially their recent
improvement.

Best C++ ide, by far. Especially with their recent enhancement to their CMake
support. right now I am writing gtkmm app in QtCreator (I am using gtkmm
instead of Qt because target system does not have Qt installed). With Clang
Code Model I would say they are almost on par with Java IDE's in term of
productivity.

~~~
zerr
How it compares to KDevelop?

~~~
slezyr
KDevelop MUCH MORE POWERFUL due to their code model.

I really want to see their code model in QtCreator and other IDEs.

~~~
IshKebab
When I used KDevelop last, QtCreator's code model was much better. It even
handles `auto` pretty well these days. And QtCreator can now use Clang for the
code model so it should be very good.

Admittedly I last used KDevelop a long time ago, but has it really improved
much faster than QtCreator? Can it autocomplete `auto` variables?

------
vilya
I really wish the Qt Company would stop bundling QtCreator as a required
component of the Qt SDK.

I use QtCreator as my main IDE & think it's great, so of course I install new
versions as soon as they become available. I compile & test against several
different versions of Qt though and every single one of them lumbers me with
an additional out-of-date copy of my IDE. This bugs me - more than it probably
should.

------
tov_objorkin
The horrible thing about QtCreator is plugins support. Most of them unstable
and crashing IDE. Dependency on Qt SDK private sources killing all my attempts
to maintain my own plugins.

------
tmsldd
Thanks ! I love you guys.. Qt/QtCreator make life a lot easier.

------
hellofunk
I wonder if Mac support has improved. I like Qt Creator but a couple of years
ago lots of weird bugs in the Mac GUI, like disappearing mouse cursors that
wouldn't come back, among other oddities. I had read reports of other users
with similar problems on Mac. I suspect most of the Qt dev team doesn't
regularly use Mac so they don't spot these issues. I tried Qt Creator again
about 9 months ago but it still felt bit problematic in a few areas.

~~~
FraKtus
Same here, we use a lot Qt but the macOS integration does give a feeling that
it's not to important to them...

------
mrskeltal
Can you inspect memory in this new version, like you can do in Visual Studio?

~~~
EliRivers
I think you're asking if it's possible to use a debugger with QT Creator. It's
had support for debuggers for at least most of the last decade, and I suspect
longer.

------
walterbell
Can QML/QtQuick work without a 3D-optimized gpu, e.g. in embedded?

~~~
joezydeco
You'll need a processor beefy enough to run the Webkit javascript engine.
There was talk a while back about V8 making it into Qt, but I haven't seen
much about it recently.

I tried it once on a 400MHz MIPS core and it was awful. I'd say you need at
least 800 to 1200 Mhz of ARMv7 core to make it look decent. Otherwise stick to
2D widgets.

~~~
bobsam
How would this work on, say, raspberry pi 2 which also has a powerful GPU?

~~~
jcelerier
You can easily get 60 FPS on a Pi 2 with Qt

------
mishurov
vim

~~~
filomeno
Yes, you can have vim inside your Qt Creator text editors, and it feels like
using vim in a terminal. Isn't it great?

------
iamgopal
From a new gen web dev perspective, who is even using qt, let alone qt creator
? ( ok, give me example, not downvotes, please. )

~~~
sprocket
I use it to generate and play with interface layouts, then run the .ui file
through pyuic5 to convert the interface into Python code. I've got a number of
Raspberry Pi touchscreen projects that this has worked well for - I can
develop on my Mac, and use the same interface on the Pi's touchscreen.

------
fenesiistvan
How this compare with Embarcadero C++ Builder?
[https://www.embarcadero.com/products/cbuilder](https://www.embarcadero.com/products/cbuilder)

Embarcadero also supports Windows, Android and iOS and they plan to add Linux
server support this year.

~~~
problems
We use Embarcadero at work for our older stuff and have moved to Qt.

It's a clunky piece of crap, built around what used to be a big community due
to Delphi in the Borland era. Their standard library is awful, support for 3rd
party libraries is slowly dying. I'm sure some people from that era love it,
but unless you have legacy code to maintain I really wouldn't suggest it.
Maybe their new version with the move towards a Clang-based compiler will be
an improvement, but the IDE itself is just... bad compared to Qt creator -
doesn't support DPI scaling, no easy jump-to-class, upgrading packages often
involves hacking at giant XML project files by hand, it's just a mess. Not
only that, but the compiler has some pretty horrid bugs. Just this morning the
compiler exited with no error, had to reboot the machine to make it work.

It's also incredibly expensive and making decent use of it almost necessitates
buying expensive component packs from 3rd party vendors like DevExpress.

If you're an individual or small time company, you can get better visual IDEs
for free via Qt Creator or VS Community. Most old Delphi-style development has
moved to WinForms or WPF in .NET land.

~~~
pjmlp
Not only did they shoot themselves regarding Delphi, they also missed the C++
RAD market.

I used to joke Visual C++ had nothing to do with visual, when comparing it
with what was possible in C++ Builder concerning GUI RAD tooling support.

OWL and VCL were ages beyond what MFC could do, and there was the VB like
experience for UI design.

But they went astray with their management decisions and now Visual C++ has
actually become visual thanks to C++/CX and XAML (not counting the two C++
.NET variants).

