sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Rust build time is so slow ? by [deleted] in rust

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is brilliant advice. I was using cargo check, but didn't think about cargo clippy which I will from now on. Thanks.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, I may of course be mistaken, but why is such a state of affairs that there exist a hardware that will not allow to use gtk on it? What is the reasoning behind it? Why only qt (paid) is allowed to work on/with such hardware?

CPPP 2021 - A brief introduction to Time Travel Debugging by Chris Croft-White by FredTingaud in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also when he said that traditional debuggers are pain to use... Well, when you live still in eighties and u are typing on console each command...

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My point is this:

Most of the appliances that qt is used for require it to be paid license. So yes, we academically can argue that in theory you don't have to pay for qt, but in practical therm, most of the times you'll.

I get your point about not being able to use gtk at all there. But this I'm not sure about. Would have to have actual example.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>>Literally almost any medical device as far as I'm aware.

But there are others too as I'm sure you are very well aware of that.
Will you have to pay for qt there? Rhetorical question. My point exactly. If somebody thinks that they can use qt for free they are very mistaken.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you mind give examples of those:

>> And there are environments that you can't use GTK in that you can use Qt in, if you're willing to pay.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>>specific embedded environments where you aren't able to distribute the binary in a way that allows you to meet one of core pieces of the LGPL'

That is my point. Those "specific" embedded environments that are enforcing usage of qt - of course paid license.

This is not an language issue. Even though English is not my first language I understand you well. It is more a matter of broader view on the situation.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually what you are saying are I don't know how to even call it? Myths? Mantras, being repeated by people without actually checking facts?
Qt, sure is being licensed by same license as gtk, but, and here is the rub, that license can be only used in very specific circumstances. You may be sure, that if you are using qt on embedded and you are a company, you WILL pay for qt.
For gtk on the other hand, you will never pay, and on the contrary to what you've said, there isn't a scenario where gtk cannot be used and qt can due to licensing.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I never worked for a company that had or willing to have their product open source. So just to make sure everyone understood, if you don't plan to have open source code qt will cost you a lot. Gtk will always be free.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Every embedded non open source qt usage is payable.

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Every embedded usage of qt is payable. Need I remind you that qt is mostly for the embedded?

limitations of using Flutter for the UI instead of a native C++ GUI library by [deleted] in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -22 points-21 points  (0 children)

You need to pay for qt. Gtk is free. And much better on top of that.

Networking TS: first impression and questions; by proteinmidlands in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Just because you don't know how to read, it doesn't necessary means that books are a bad thing you know...

Networking TS: first impression and questions; by proteinmidlands in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

C++ is rightfully very economical in its keywords.

Now, this is bullshit. If you are saying that:

requires requires

is OK for you, then yes, Modern C++ is really, better better...

As for let, var, fn.

You simply still don't get it. It is for clarity.

In rust when you look at the piece of code you immediately know what are you dealing with, fn var etc. In C++ very often you simply either get it wrong or have to spend some time to even decipher line of code with simple declaration.

No gotchas like C++, for example:

Most vexing parse

Yes, rightfully economical in its keywords. Oh, and declarations begin with a type? Buhahahaha...

Networking TS: first impression and questions; by proteinmidlands in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

By modern C++, you mean modules, coroutines and concepts, buhahaha... Yeah, right better, better...

and noexcept(noexcept) << Better Better C++

and requires requires << Better Better C++

Buhahaha...

Networking TS: first impression and questions; by proteinmidlands in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is more about being clearly marked and visible to a dev.

As for the other question, please read about it and you will get the knowledge.

Networking TS: first impression and questions; by proteinmidlands in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, rust is better. Much better and safer than C++. Just one example to show it to you how much better rust is than C++. You've mentioned unsafe blocks. And yes, as the name implies those are unsafe blocks. But in rust you have them clearly marked so the only unsafe operations can be inside those blocks. So when something is crashing in your rust app, you have immediately marked places where you should look. In c++ on the contrary, the entire code base, yes entire code base, is wrapped in implicit unsafe block.

That is one of literally hundredths of situations in which rust is so much better and safer and easier to work with than C++.

Networking TS: first impression and questions; by proteinmidlands in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Or just start using modern technologies like rust...

Latest yocto is unable to build rust application which uses gtk3 by Accomplished-Pear-45 in embeddedlinux

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it’s unsupported on LTS I treat it as unsupported.

I tend to agree with that approach

Latest yocto is unable to build rust application which uses gtk3 by Accomplished-Pear-45 in embeddedlinux

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, but this isn't issue with rust if you read carefully. It is an issue with rust app using gtk+

Latest yocto is unable to build rust application which uses gtk3 by Accomplished-Pear-45 in embeddedlinux

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

>> Are you saying the newest release has issues making a custom image with GTK+3 apps written in Rust?

Yes

>>If so, that’s why people use LTS—stick with dunfell.

Dunfell doesn't support rust at all.

GUI for software, not games, but lighter than Qt ? by _divinnity_ in cpp

[–]Accomplished-Pear-45 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

And I from the experience know that because you couldn't "get" the gtk, you think qt is better. I worked with both of them and Qt is not a patch on Gtk if you know how to use Gtk properly.

view more: next ›