7

I wonder if my perception on this subject is correct. Is there any point of using embarcadero's C++ builder (now with their compiler based on clang) and FireMonkey framework in favour of Qt? The point is that Qt seems to be leaving widgets behind and they are concentrating more on javascript, while embarcadero seem to be very commited to C++. Am I right or I see things incorrectly? Thank you.

Steven Carlson
  • 925
  • 1
  • 10
  • 25
user336359
  • 1,244
  • 1
  • 11
  • 18
  • 4
    @downvoter I really don't understand your reason. I'm asking genuine question in order to chose correct path (Qt or C++ builder) in my professional career as a C++ dev. What's wrong with that? – user336359 Dec 15 '12 at 11:38
  • 1
    I think the topic is not "not constructive" whatsoever. I think it is constructive. – ozgur Nov 14 '15 at 20:39
  • 1
    I have to use CBuilder 10.2. I can not recommend the IDE. Compared to other IDEs like Visual Studio or Eclipse it is a stone aged IDE. – powerpete May 12 '21 at 12:53

1 Answers1

1

Qt seems to be leaving widgets behind and they are concentrating more on javascript

No. From Qt 5.0 onwards the push is for GUIs to be written in QML whilst the backend is still whatever you want it to be (C++ traditionally, but there are Qt bindings for almost language). The primary reason for this is because writing modern fluid hardware accelerated UIs is quite laborious, so Qt have written a JavaScript-based language that automates much of it; the other reason is because although everyone knows that GUI code and backend code should be totally separate, in the real world over time they tend to become mixed, having a QML frontend with a signal/slot driven backend enforces this.

Also Qt have all the 'traditional' widgets available in QML (currently still in beta but aimed for release for v5.1 - I think), and the C++ widgets will still be available in their own library. Not to mention the fact that Qt always supports the previous version, so you've probably got another 7 years for 'normal' v4.x C++ widgets!

I cannot comment Embarcadero or FireMonkey - because I have never heard of them...

cmannett85
  • 21,725
  • 8
  • 76
  • 119
  • I know Qt (with MinGW on Windows and GCC/Clang on Linux) as well as the Embarcadero C++Builder products. Verdict: Do not even consider Embarcadero. Every aspect of their offering is crap - generally, not just in comparison to Qt. – rettichschnidi Jul 15 '16 at 11:10
  • 1
    Using C++ Builder for last 20 years. Classic C++ compiler was working well, but did not change much for last 20 years. On paper their Clang++ is the best, in practice it's way too buggy, PITA unusable for real projects. Compiling now +/- works, their 32 bit linker explodes often, debugging support is ridiculous and impossible to use in real project. FireMonkey is been there for so long, but it's still not usable for production other than trivial apps. When they announce new feature, it takes 10 years to become +/- stable. Currently migrating to QT Quick for new projects and I am delighted. – Niki Dec 24 '19 at 08:40