> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Timothy Pearson > <kb9vqf@...> wrote: >>> Will someone tell me or put the link to the description of why someone >>> would need to rename QT API? >>> >>> I know that for programmer this is a disaster!!! This will strangle >>> the development! >> >> I have addressed this issue multiple times on this mailing list. It is >> impossible to use Qt4-based libraries in TDE, such as Webkit, while the >> symbols from Qt3 conflict with those from Qt4. > > But why would you need both Qt3 and Qt4? Just choose one and stick > with it. Do you want Qt4, then migrate completely. It's not that simple. Porting TDE fully to Qt4 is easily 5-10 years of solid work with current manpower. >> >> You can blame the developers of C++ and Qt if you like, but unless we >> want >> TDE to remain niche by never integrating well, and also not being able >> to >> take advantage of all the work put into Qt4-based libraries, this >> renaming >> had to be done. > > Can you put some examples of what issues with Qt4 this renaming addresses? Yes! I'll pick an obvious example, KHTML. I would like to replace the broken KHTML engine with Webkit using Qt4. Problem is, I can't link a Qt4 library into a TDE library or program due to symbol conflicts. Even if you trick the compiler and linker, the program will crash at runtime because the C++ runtime will not know which symbols (Qt3 or Qt4) to use when function names and static members have the same name. >> It isn't hard to adapt BTW, just tack a "t" onto the front of the old >> "q<foo>" functions and static members. > > There are standard API and standard documentation, and development > tools that are designed for this standard. Getting into this business > you doom yourself on endless job of synchronizing with Qt4 API > evolution. Not saying about the deep of current API coverage. That is > not the work for one man! ??? I'm NOT doing that! Qt4 is lacking basic features TDE needs. >> >> "Stock" Qt3 is available if it is needed, but I am personally using TQt3 >> so that I can take advantage of Qt4-based system libraries in the >> future. >> >> Tim >> > > If f.ex. I will utilize reference countable pointers from Qt4, then > Qt3 will go to depreciation at once! So this TQt looks like all big > nonsense... :-( No, (T)Qt3 will still be needed as the foundation for much of the TDE code. Just because I can take advantage of a few new Qt4 features ***where appropriate***, to add new functionality to TDE, does not mean that the need for the existing foundation of (T)Qt3 has been magically replaced. All I am doing is making it so that I can use Qt4 libraries in newly written TDE code, for specific tasks where it is the best tool to use (i.e. a well-supported library has been built with Qt4). Does this make sense? Also, I'm currently down with the flu, so I may be coming across a bit stronger than I should. ;-) Tim