Qt Developers Discuss Theoretical Clang-Based Tool For Porting Qt5 Code To Qt6

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Qt Developers Discuss Theoretical Clang-Based Tool For Porting Qt5 Code To Qt6

While the future of Qt as an open-source project isn't too clear for now it's progressing as if all is well. One of the new items being discussed on the Qt 6 front is discussing a possible LLVM Clang based tool to help developers in automatically converting all of their Qt 5 syntax into a Qt 6 compatible manner...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Qt6-Clang-Auto-Convert-Helper

[Doug]

So, would it be available only for paying customers for the first year?

[darkbasic]

Wouldn't it be better to first figure out if there will be any qt6 in their future?

[Veto]

Can someone explain in a few words, what the major differences are between e.g. Qt4/Qt5/Qt6?

I would have expected the API of a framework/library to be somewhat stable in a sixth iteration and changes to be mostly be in the form of add-ons and expansions.

[zxy_thf]

Can someone explain in a few words, what the major differences are between e.g. Qt4/Qt5/Qt6?

I would have expected the API of a framework/library to be somewhat stable in a sixth iteration and changes to be mostly be in the form of add-ons and expansions.

as far as I'm aware of there is little API changes b/w Qt 4/5.
I grabbed two Qt4 projects (namely smplayer and meshlab, before the official ports happened) and recompiled with Qt5 and they worked without any major problems.
However Qt5 has deprecated quite a few components like QGLWidget (in favor of QOpenGLWidget)

No idea what have changed in Qt 6.

[ed31337]

I hope Qt6 doesn't turn out to be like the VB6 to VB.net "transition." The part about "the future of Qt as an open-source project isn't too clear" sounds rather ominous too.

[Slartifartblast]

To Qt, or not to Qt, that is the question:


Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer


The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,


Or to take arms against a sea of troubles


And by opposing end them.

[kpedersen]

Can someone explain in a few words, what the major differences are between e.g. Qt4/Qt5/Qt6?

I would have expected the API of a framework/library to be somewhat stable in a sixth iteration and changes to be mostly be in the form of add-ons and expansions.

Put it this way; you wouldn't want to be the poor shmuck porting a large GUI program from Qt4 to 6. The annoying custom MOC build system alone will take time.
In my opinion, they are different enough that they should all be called different project names. (i.e Qt, Susan, FancyUI respectively)

[pipe13]

Put it this way; you wouldn't want to be the poor shmuck porting a large GUI program from Qt4 to 6. The annoying custom MOC build system alone will take time.
In my opinion, they are different enough that they should all be called different project names. (i.e Qt, Susan, FancyUI respectively)

They *are* called by different project names. And whether MOC is an incredibly elegant and useful feature, or an annoying bug, depends entirely upon one's POV.

[Veto]

Put it this way; you wouldn't want to be the poor shmuck porting a large GUI program from Qt4 to 6. The annoying custom MOC build system alone will take time.
In my opinion, they are different enough that they should all be called different project names. (i.e Qt, Susan, FancyUI respectively)

But why?? Can it now do wobbly windows or cook your eggs?

I have tinkered a bit with Qt a couple of times - but I must confess it really makes me want to look elsewhere, if they can't keep a somewhat stable API.
(I only need to make small GUI apps once in a while)