AUG
5
2002

New Milestone for Qt C# Bindings

Qt# 0.4 has been released! Qt# is a set of cross-platform C# bindings for Trolltech's Qt GUI toolkit that is currently targeted towards Mono and Portable.NET. Along with some initial API documentation, code samples, tutorials and bugfixes, there have been a lot of improvements over 0.3, including support for events, multiple custom slots, object tracking and even preliminary support for Microsoft.NET. Download here -- some screenshots can be found here [Ed: wow and wow], and Debian apt sources here. Interested parties should also feel free to drop by #qtcsharp on irc.OpenProjects.net.

Comments

I know there was work on new Perl bindings, has anything happened with those?


By anon at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

I'll second that - I know quite a few perl developers who aren't going to suddenly take up C#, python etc just because perl isn't flavour of the month at the moment.

Come on kde folks - kde is so cool, its a crime not to have bindings for as many languages as possible :)


By Richard Moore at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

OK I'll reply to myself.

Yeah, I know its Trolltech I should be ranting at since these are QT bindings :)


By Richard Moore at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

In fact, the KDE bindings are built with a modified kdoc, as kdoc is already able to parse the C++ code and build a tree of it, it would have been stupid to rewrite this functionnality from scratch. This modified version of kdoc is called Kalyptus.
With this tools, KDE developers (such as David Faure) were able to generate Python, Perl, Ruby, C#, C, Java, ... bindings for KDE and Qt.
Just go on http://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/2002-May/007952... , to see that I am right.

As you've read it above, there are already Perl bindings for KDE and Qt, just go on http://developer.kde.org/language-bindings/index.html or http://search.cpan.org/search?dist=PerlQt.

I hope I solved your problems.

Have a nice day, all !

--
"As a computing professional, I believe it would be unethical for me to advise, recommend, or support the use (save possibly for personal amusement) of any product that is or depends on any Microsoft product."


By Chucky/OutMax! at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Good to see that something is there, but the most recent revision I can find on CPAN is PerlQt-2.105.tar.gz dated 7th March 2000.

KDE/QT3 had been out for some time now but the KDE developer page states:

"Getting your perl scripts to work with KDE. This page is not done yet, but there are Qt-2 and KDE-2 perl bindings on CPAN. There is work going on to update those to Qt3."

Looks to me like perl 6 will be here before up to date QT bindings - and we all know how long that's going to take :)

Anyway, thanks for the reply.


By Richard Moore at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

QtPerl is ready.
It's fully working and has a complete ui compiler for Designer files.

We are now in the process of writing documentation, furbishing astounding screenshots, etc...
It should be released next week.

Cheers,

Germain


By germain at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Wonderful!

I retract all my posts on this subject - you never know, might even be able to give something to KDE (perl based, of course) in the future instead of just take :)

Thanks for the good news,
Rich


By Richard Moore at Thu, 2002/08/08 - 5:00am

>you never know, might even be able to give something to KDE (perl based, of >course) in the future instead of just take :)

Well, the initial release will only provide bindings for Qt... KDE is the next step ! (not too far, hopefully)

Also -I'm really nuts- it is not QtPerl (though I like this name better) but indeed PerlQt, as it follows the naming of previous bindings for Qt 2.

Cheers,

G.


By germain at Thu, 2002/08/08 - 5:00am

> Well, the initial release will only provide bindings for Qt... KDE is the next step ! (not too far, hopefully)

Damn - never mind though, something's way better than nothing!

I played around with perl wxWindows/GTK a bit but never really got into it - definitely prefer KDE/QT, though I appreciate the cool stuff the Gnome folks are doing with Gnome2.

>Also -I'm really nuts- it is not QtPerl

Can't say I noticed ;->


By Richard Moore at Fri, 2002/08/09 - 5:00am

It would be nice if they put a link to the Qt# website
as they have done with gtk# don't you think?


By ai at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

Yes, they really should do this. Nobody talks about Qt over there though.


By KDE User at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

To be fair, Go-Mono.org does have a link to Qt# on there resources page. Gtk# is there prefered GUI toolkit which should be of no surprise :-)

I've found Miguel and the Ximian/Mono team to be nothing but entirely gracious and helpful.

Cheers,

Adam


By Adam Treat at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

Not even a news item on their site?


By KDE User at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

Go-Mono.org does have a Qt#-comment on the first page as well.
Of course, it's not a surprise but must feel a little bit
strange for the Qt#-team.


By ai at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

Ximian is cool.


By KDE User at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

No... no... nononono. Ximian and Miguel are evil. They are not followers of the holy cause of TrollTech everywhere (tm).

Ximian must die - they just use VC money to copy TheKompany and smash the benevolent Godhead of TrollTech. Shawn Gordon tells me so.

You must not post nice comments about Ximian/Miguel here, it is heresy and a banning offence. Consider yourself warned.


By KDE Zealot at Sat, 2002/08/17 - 5:00am

What does it mean?
Will next MS Office releases (based on C#) integrate with KDE????
That would be great!
Anhybody could explain a little bit what does Qt C# bindongs mean?


By Anonymous at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

There is no way the next MS Office releases will be based on C#. Just not gonna happen.


By KDE User at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

The next version of Office does not run under the CLR, it does however uses .NET Web Services. So in other words, it woulnd't run on Mono. It would still be a Win32 application.


By Rajan Rishyakaran at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

etc. etc.

On e should be able to popup a KDevelop QtDesigner window and drag and drop a Python <---> DCOP GUI clicky controller thingy application of some sort inside 5 minutes eg:

Boss: Need custom app with cool widgets for querying 4 different databases dumping into spreadsheet and doing fancy printing/faxing/PDF conversion of the resulting charts. Need it tomorrow, slave!! (boss goes off on other rant ...)

Developer: [flips open laptop in boss's office opens KDevelop/QtDesigner]

[Developer drag and drops some Qt<-->Python<-->DCOP querying app together with DB access widgets (built-in to Qt no??), another 3 buttons to export to KSpread via DCOP, another button to use DCOP and scripted KSpread and CUPS (which rules to world) with choices

[] Fax query results to: [________]
[] Create PDF
[] E-Mail PDF to : [__________]

Print
=====

[] HQ Printer (vai IPP)
[] Mail room printer
[] Legal Dept. printer

[] View streaming video from gym change rooms: M:[] F:[]

....]

Boss: ... [finishing rant] and furthermore we will convert all DBA's KDE workstations to XP!!!

Developer: Oh ... I just finished developing the application you asked for.

Boss: Wah??!! Lemme see that you genius!!


By Imaginative Pyt... at Mon, 2002/08/05 - 5:00am

When they give it up and support Python.

I'll second that.


By caoilte at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

My dream is that someday I'll be able to write QT apps in PHP.
I'm learning C++, but PHP is soooooooo much nicer and easier than C++ that it would be more than welcome to being able to use QT with it.

Currently Gtk works with PHP/CGI, but I'm a QT fan, so I hope it will someday work with it :)


By Iuri Fiedoruk at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

PHP is not easier.

PHP seems easier while you learn it.

PHP will be considerably harder once you start doing real world stuff.


By Roberto Alsina at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

Hummm, I tought managing databases was a real world (tm) thing.
PHP is really easier than C++ and can do things that C++ code do as well as it (but losses on speed, sure).
Besides, I don't said I was going to build windows or games with it. PHP is good for writting some small apps as moo/mud clients, d20 player generators, etc.
And all those things are real world man :)


By Iuri Fiedoruk at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

PHP is simple. Simple != easy.

Now, python, on the other hand, is simple AND easy ;-)

PS: if it is not to build "windows", hat is the point of PHP in a qt related thread?


By Roberto Alsina at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

I metan m$ windows ;)

Well, in my case I think PHP is simple and easy as you think about Phyton that I think isn't easy....so each person have it's prefereed language and let's not start a language war here :)


By Iuri Fiedoruk at Tue, 2002/08/06 - 5:00am

Python *is* actually easier to learn that PHP. The syntax is easier, data handling (lists, maps etc) are easier to use etc. Nothing wrong with PHP, but it is harder to learn, especially for a newbie. Just think of the weird semicolons ";" you have to sprinkle all over, but not on every line.


By chakie at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

PHP means "PHP Hypertext Preprocessor". Since when is a hypertext preprocessor considered a full programming language?


By Stof at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Can't a language evolves besides it's original name?
Did you already see what python and perl means? Tehir names means nothing acctually, where made just to create a regular word with each letter.
This means they are bad? Sure not!
C means just C, the languace after A and B. C is crappy because it's name?
Should it be: GLTMEOA
(Great Language That Makes Everthing, Or Almost)?
SURE NOT! No need for it.
Now, please stop just talking bad of PHP.
Seems like your guys think that if someone says PHP is good, he means "all other languages are crappy". :(


By Iuri Fiedoruk at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

No, but that preprocessor part in a name tells you what was the purpose when it was designed and how it could likely effect the design of the language.

Personally, I think PHP is (just) C with better string handling. If that's good or bad depends on person.


By Marko Samastur at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

I'm not talking about it's name, I'm talking about it's function! It's function is exactly what the name says: to preprocess things.
I have a hard time believing that a preprocessor can be used to create GUIs.


By Stof at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

I mean: believing that a preprocessor is an effective tool to create GUIs.


By Stof at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

You have no idea what PHP is. Look into the Zend VM and the PHP compiler. Yes, PHP 1.0 started out as a perl script and a small C program. Since 4, it's a powerful development environment that allows the creation of command line, ncurses and gtk applications, and has a wide library of loadable binary modules that can also be accessed via a CPAN like mechanism (called PEAR).

And if you doubt that it could have turned into a nice language from such simple beginnings, consider that C++ started out as a header file with a bunch of C Preprocessor directives.

--
Evan


By Evan "JabberWok... at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

C++ did NOT start like that.

Yes, some C++ compilers are "preprocessors" that generate C code.

No, it is not the usual C preprocessor.


By Roberto Alsina at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Funny, back in 1983 when Bjarne Stroustrup created CFRONT, it started out as a simple set of header files. By the time he was writing about it in Dr. Dobbs, Byte or whatever I first heard about it back when, it had a simple namespace mangler, but in introducing the new variant of C in his articles, he would say that it started out as some neat CPP hacks (I think he also mentioned its CPP heritage in the CUJ article when they were looking to finalize the language spec, or right afterwards). It wasn't until 1990 or thereabouts that "real" C++ compilers appeared. I know - I was an avid C user (to the ludicrious level of writing my own tiny C in asm) throughout the 80s, and followed all the variants and compilers very very closely.

Be that as it may, C++ is not the issue here. PHP is. PHP would make a fine candidate for Qt and KDE bindings. My MP3 organizer is written in PHP, and currently uses curses. While I personally prefer Ruby or C, PHP is not a terrible language in terms of being a primarily procedural language with a slight smattering of OOP concepts. It also happens to be the universal data juncture tool, even better than perl, and with a syntax saltier than perl's syntax (a Good Thing, IMO). PHP has a very detailed and flexible library system and a CPAN like system called PEAR.

No reason not to do it, and it may encourage KDE development, which is a good thing, last I checked.

--
Evan


By Evan "JabberWok... at Thu, 2002/08/08 - 5:00am

No KDE bindings for PHP, hence it is EVIL. Once bindings are written it becomes blessed and holy. Roberta knows the truth.


By KDE Zealot at Sat, 2002/08/17 - 5:00am

Whoa. Mispelling a name so it has a different gender.
What a pinnacle of wit.


By Roberto Alsina at Tue, 2002/08/20 - 5:00am

I am php programmer and I would thank for qt and kde bindings of php,
I have a idea (might be silly) there is wrapper SMOKE on qt and kde where
classes and functions and other stuff can be
called from it I think a perl bindings is based on it and it is working.
I hope I helped in this discussion.
troby.


By troby at Sun, 2002/12/15 - 6:00am

Python's name is not an acronym. Python is called python. Not P.Y.T.H.O.N.

Python means python. It is a hommage to monty python.


By Roberto Alsina at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Ok, I tought I said, not let's start a war. :(

I think Python is trash, junk, sh*t. Does this removes any merits of it or will stops you liking it? NOOOOOOOOOO!
So why instead of saying PHP is bad MY language is better don't you people just keep quiet?
If someone makes PHP bindings for QT will you people being forced to use it instead of Perl or Python? SURE NOT!
C'mon!


By Iuri Fiedoruk at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Relax. When someone tells you python is good, if you ask him, he CAN provide examples of software developed using it, and explain why the language has helped him being effective in the project.

Python advocates can provide backup for their claims.

PHP advocates, on the other hand, write "sh*t" in their responses.

Go, take some linden, relax.


By Roberto Alsina at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

>PHP advocates, on the other hand, write "sh*t" in their responses.

Whereas you write "sh*t" instead. Big difference zealot boi.


By KDE Zealot at Sat, 2002/08/17 - 5:00am

Funny that you call me zealot, KDE Zealot. Does that mean we are relatives?

All I meant by what you quote is that the previous poster simply called python "sh*t" without giving any argument whatsoever.

On python´s behalf, I can point out coherent syntax, simple to use object orientation, rich class library, readability, a simple extension and embedding
mechanism, good Qt bindings, and JYTHON (python in the JVM).

In all those aspects, I think Python is a better language than PHP for
real world usage.

Now, anyone can call this "sh*t". But it is going to take a whole lot more
than a silly dot post to make that charge stick.


By Roberto Alsina at Sat, 2002/08/17 - 5:00am

That is "wiggle" again.


By Navindra Umanee at Sat, 2002/08/17 - 5:00am

Actually, it's not. Is that why you banned all Freeserve users from posting again, beause someone posted three sarcastic messages lampooning the zealot nutcases who inhabit your site? Just how stupid are you, anyway?

Clue: If I wanted to play this game, I could rotate through a couple of hundreds proxies, and a dozen or so free ISPs. In fact, with a dumbass like you in charge, I could probably get most of the UK internet population banned from this site with a little effort.

There are just some people who haven't the smarts or the temper to run a forum site, and you are the perfect example. Think yourself lucky that this is little more than a five minute time-wasting exercise for me.


By KDE Zealot at Sun, 2002/08/18 - 5:00am

Ah, well, while we're at pluggin languages : Ruby.


By Guillaume Laurent at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

Ruby is cool.

I am too entrenched in what I know to switch, but should I ever feel a need to learn a new language, Ruby would be a big candidate :-)


By Roberto Alsina at Wed, 2002/08/07 - 5:00am

If you know C++, Perl or Python, learning Ruby is a matter of a few hours. I don't think I've ever used a language which was such a delight to program with.


By Guillaume Laurent at Thu, 2002/08/08 - 5:00am

Well, python does take 2 hours to learn, too.

It takes a little loner to learn to use it effectively, of course.

But ok, you convinced me, there goes the third sunday of August!


By Roberto Alsina at Thu, 2002/08/08 - 5:00am

Then there's Rebol ;-)


By Kuba at Fri, 2002/08/16 - 5:00am

Pages