Home » U++ Library support » U++ Library : Other (not classified elsewhere) » Comments requested
| Comments requested [message #8971] |
Wed, 11 April 2007 00:28  |
jimmygyuma
Messages: 6
Registered: April 2007
Location: Yuma, AZ
|
Promising Member |
|
|
The focus of my programming efforts are image editing and image manipulation for the purpose of creating custom video effects and transitions frame by frame. I have been using VC++6 and Qt3, with necessary assists from jEdit and Scite. Endless headaches are the norm. Also the programs are for my own use on Windows.
So, the idea of being able to do everything in one place, with reduced complexity is very, very attractive. However, two things about U++ give me pause. I would appreciate anyone's comments on these.
1. On poking around in the docs, it seems that U++ graphics are outdated. I routinely work on a pixel by pixel basis, but I'm not interested in writing my own line-drawing routines. Apparently I would have to do this with anything other than a solid line. With DotDash, etc, only one pixel wide? Also with brushes, the only kind available are solid? It said something about using Windows DC's, Yikes! I have never finished a project doing it Microsoft"s way, and have no interest in doing the interface with U++ and the meat with Microsoft. If I wanted to do it their way I wouldn't be here.
2. Another likely deal breaker. The designer creates its own file. Designers are used to get a lot of the grunt work done, but eventually you have to abandon it and go to the code. I have used Java and Qt and inevitably there would come a point when I had to go back, in the code, and change a lot of what the designer had produced. Also, in Qt for example, there is no QScrollView in the toolkit, so you put something else in as a place holder then go back to the code and change everything to handle a QScrollView. So, if TheIDE doesn't produce code, what do you go back and change?
As I said, comments appreciated.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Comments requested [message #8978 is a reply to message #8971] |
Wed, 11 April 2007 08:31  |
 |
mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| jimmygyuma wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 18:28 |
1. On poking around in the docs, it seems that U++ graphics are outdated.
|
The basic set of operations of Draw is intentionally kept minimal, at bare minimum needed to build GUI applications.
Advanced operations are planned to be covered by special package.
Of course, depends on what exactly you need now. Perhaps be more specific.
| Quote: |
2. Another likely deal breaker. The designer creates its own file. Designers are used to get a lot of the grunt work done, but eventually you have to abandon it and go to the code. I have used Java and Qt and inevitably there would come a point when I had to go back, in the code, and change a lot of what the designer had produced. Also, in Qt for example, there is no QScrollView in the toolkit, so you put something else in as a place holder then go back to the code and change everything to handle a QScrollView. So, if TheIDE doesn't produce code, what do you go back and change?
|
Well, this one is trivial. To put "unknown" widget into your design, just use "User class" and type in any name you wish. Alternatively, you can even leave the name empty, in this case you have to add it in your derived structure.
U++ layout designer in fact produces "base class templates", so you can access and modify all members easily by code.
Mirek
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Apr 29 11:41:39 CEST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02565 seconds
|
Members
Pages
Help
Register
Login
Home
