Home » Community » Newbie corner » U++ vs Qt
| U++ vs Qt [message #27136] |
Sun, 27 June 2010 15:54  |
281264
Messages: 270
Registered: June 2010
Location: Spain
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
I have been exploring U++ and Qt (free version of it, of course). One advantage of Qt is how well documented the tool is. In this respect, in my humble opinion, U++ needs to improve. One advantage of U++ is its BSD license that allows you to create commercial applications without having to pay a fee (is this correct?)
I see U++ a bit inclined toward SQL applications. As my plan is to build an engineering application with extensive usage of OpenGL, do you think U++ is appropriate to do it? What limitations has U++ got?
By the way, I am finding problems with the debugger: it does not work properly.
Please, what do you think about the topic?
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ vs Qt [message #27140 is a reply to message #27136] |
Sun, 27 June 2010 22:11  |
 |
koldo
Messages: 3356
Registered: August 2008
|
Senior Veteran |
|
|
Hello Javier
| Quote: |
I have been exploring U++ and Qt (free version of it, of course). One advantage of Qt is how well documented the tool is. In this respect, in my humble opinion, U++ needs to improve. One advantage of U++ is its BSD license that allows you to create commercial applications without having to pay a fee (is this correct?)
|
You are right. If you develop commercial applications not open sourced, you do not need to pay any fee (including Windows  ).
| Quote: |
I see U++ a bit inclined toward SQL applications. As my plan is to build an engineering application with extensive usage of OpenGL, do you think U++ is appropriate to do it? What limitations has U++ got?
|
I think U++ is very appropriate for engineering applications. I can credit it. And many other too. The limit is in the extent of the libraries, but we are widening it.
| Quote: |
By the way, I am finding problems with the debugger: it does not work properly.
|
For Windows MSC compiler is better supported than MinGW, specially in debugging. I advise you to install it. It is free for commercial use (free, not open).
Best regards
Iñaki
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ vs Qt [message #27143 is a reply to message #27136] |
Sun, 27 June 2010 23:23 |
andrei_natanael
Messages: 262
Registered: January 2009
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
Hi Javier,
| 281264 wrote on Sun, 27 June 2010 16:54 |
One advantage of Qt is how well documented the tool is. In this respect, in my humble opinion, U++ needs to improve.
|
I don't miss the documentation to often. Once you know the basics in U++ you may learn new things from code. One fast way to search for something is to use CTRL+J in TheIde, feed it with function(ality) you're looking for (try with abbreviations and synonyms ). Also TheIde help have search functionality.
| Quote: |
I see U++ a bit inclined toward SQL applications. As my plan is to build an engineering application with extensive usage of OpenGL, do you think U++ is appropriate to do it? What limitations has U++ got?
|
U++ really rocks in SQL applications development , still it have OpenGL support in GLCtrl (see OpenGL example from reference assembly). In U++ if you want to use OpenGL you have to know it's API. Qt provides a bit more advanced OpenGL support in it's QtOpenGL module.
| Quote: |
By the way, I am finding problems with the debugger: it does not work properly.
Please, what do you think about the topic?
|
The simple way of getting ride of problems created with debugger is to write code that doesn't need to be debugged  .
I used it only few times and that mostly on non-U++ projects. If your problems are memory leaks, then U++ provide support to find they easily. See *.log file after you build (in DEBUG mode) and run your application (ALT+L in TheIde).
If you follow U++ guidelines you won't have to use the debugger.
Best regards,
Andrei
P.S.: See comparison between U++ and Qt, it may put a spell on you and use U++ forever
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ vs Qt [message #27144 is a reply to message #27136] |
Mon, 28 June 2010 00:48 |
|
|
| 281264 wrote on Sun, 27 June 2010 15:54 |
By the way, I am finding problems with the debugger: it does not work properly.
|
Bit off-topic, but: You can use LOG and DUMP* macros. They support some cool tricks of U++ automatic formating, so it is very easy and quick to use. I do most of my debugging that way. Some examples: int i=4;
Point p(2,3);
String s="abcdefg";
Vector<int> v; v.Add(2); v.Add(14); v.Add(3);
LOG("i has value "<<i<<" s="<<s<<" and point p is "<<p);
DUMP(i);
DUMP(p);
DUMP(s);
DUMPC(v);
Honza
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Apr 20 04:15:04 CEST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04305 seconds
|
Members
Pages
Help
Register
Login
Home
