Qt 5.3 Beta Released -- Improves Android, Adds WebSockets

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Qt 5.3 Beta Released -- Improves Android, Adds WebSockets

Digia announced this morning the first beta of the upcoming Qt 5.3 tool-kit...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTY0MjU

[toka]

bloated, more bloated, Qt?

When you let Ohloh.net compare the bare "lines of code" you get:

• Qt4 3,174,306 http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt
• Qt5 6,729,055 http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt5
• glibc 2,382,058 http://www.ohloh.net/p/glibc
• GTK+ 796,445 http://www.ohloh.net/p/gtk

Is this what we call bloat?

[Pajn]

When you let Ohloh.net compare the bare "lines of code" you get:

• Qt4 3,174,306 http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt
• Qt5 6,729,055 http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt5
• glibc 2,382,058 http://www.ohloh.net/p/glibc
• GTK+ 796,445 http://www.ohloh.net/p/gtk

Is this what we call bloat?

Lines of code have nothing to do with anything.

[toka]

Lines of codes and commit numbers

GLX-gear, Lines of codes and commit numbers are somewhat useless benchmarks. Yeah. Especially when comparing different programming laguages (C and C++).
Still, I'd like to start a (civil) discussion about bloat.

[Pajn]

Still, I'd like to start a (civil) discussion about bloat.

Then what features does QT have that you think it shouldn't?
Or what is QT doing that could be done much smaller or faster?

Personally I have never waded through the QT source code and only written patches
to QT programs (meaning I have never written a QT program from scratch) so I can't
comment on it generally. If you want to start a serious discussion (which I agree could
be interesting) then you should probably start with pointing out specific stuff, else it
will probably turn into a flame-war.

[benalib]

for productivity, code readablity and platforms support Gtk+ is far behind Qt5
every developer who swiths from gtk to Qt knows this

[pingufunkybeat]

Is this what we call bloat?

1) Most of this is documentation
2) Qt runs on far more platforms. Even with code reuse, this leads to more code
3) C/C++
4) Qt includes lots of functionality that GTK uses from other libraries: Pango, Webkit, multimedia, threading, etc.
5) It's modular, so you only link against the libraries you actually use

[toka]

Then what features does QT have that you think it shouldn't?
Or what is QT doing that could be done much smaller or faster?

Personally I have never waded through the QT source code and only written patches
to QT programs (meaning I have never written a QT program from scratch) so I can't
comment on it generally. If you want to start a serious discussion (which I agree could
be interesting) then you should probably start with pointing out specific stuff, else it
will probably turn into a flame-war.

I can't! I simply looked at the lines of code, and though knowing you most probably cannot compare between C and C++, I asked myself about "the bloat". Is it there? Is it serious?
Let's at least compare LOCs of Qt4 with Qt5. It seams huge. Of course if the code has become better documented, this would be rather good!

for productivity, code readablity and platforms support Gtk+ is far behind Qt5
every developer who swiths from gtk to Qt knows this

People who use Qt for their GUI widgets probably do not wade through the Qt-code. They read API documentation, and expect help in forums etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCompris https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireshark Subsurface and of course the comming LXDE-Qt have switched because of missing help, I think.

[benalib]

People who use Qt for their GUI widgets probably do not wade through the Qt-code. They read API documentation, and expect help in forums etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCompris https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireshark Subsurface and of course the comming LXDE-Qt have switched because of missing help, I think.

openshot developers explain why they 're switching to Qt
http://www.openshotvideo.com/2013/04...and-funds.html

[Emdek]

@toka, do these stats include copy of WebKit source? It's a "monster" itself.