I tried out the demo application which was pretty impressive. However building it and integrating it with my own code is hard because it's such a large project.
Has anyone successfully used it for their own projects? Was is difficult to build and integrate with your own C++ code?
Link: STLab.
For the interested: there's also a Google Tech Talk clarifying the philosophical ideas behind the project.
ASL is used fairly heavily within Adobe. The layout library (Eve) is used in many Adobe products and variants of it have been in use since Photoshop 5. The property model library (Adam) got a little use in CS4 and will likely be used more in future products. I can no longer speak with certainty because I left Adobe a few months ago and am now working at Google. I still put in some time on ASL and continue to collaborate with Prof. Jarvi and some of his students on the property model library (see the paper on the ASL wiki).
It can be a bit difficult to integrate with your product. The platform libraries in ASL (backends to Adam and Eve for Windows and Mac Carbon) started as some small example code, then the community started to refine it (the Windows port was initially a community effort), then we had some ambition to make it a real, supported library. But then Apple dropped Carbon for 64 bits and Adobe's framework plans changed so we weren't able to leverage our efforts here inside Adobe. Because of this the platform libraries are a little shaky - if your code base is already using a framework you might consider integrating Adam and Eve directly (the API for both libraries is very small). There are two challenges with integrating with a framework. Eve needs good metrics to do a good layout, including things like baselines - getting that from your UI toolkit may be tough. The property model library assumes a strict model/view/controller pattern that most UI toolkits don't obey so you have to do a bit of adapting. Feel free to ask questions on the ASL mailing list. We can also help with building - it really isn't as complex as it seems.
I watched the Tech Talk.. He sort of lost me when he showed the real world example code and then a massively shorter version using his model... I suspect that his implementation, just like anything else, would in practice be bogged down by real world considerations if actually pursued to solve real problems...
That said, it was interesting... The first half of the talk was great... I especially liked his assertion that Generic programming is the mathematics of coding...
Related
I'm developing my first Windows desktop application and I'm trying to figure out what the best approach would be to create the program's GUI.
I know, I know... I feel stupid for asking considering the amount of data on the subject on SO. However most answers seem outdated and I'm not sure if they fit my specific project. Also tutorials for Windows 8 'metro apps' are clogging my Google search results, which is NOT what I'm looking for.
I use Visual Studio. I've followed tutorials. I have basic knowledge of C and Java and extensive experience with PHP. I'm excited to learn C++, so I'm not looking for GUIs to create a GUI (like WinForms). I also don't care about managed code and portability for now, especially since I'm trying to avoid dependencies (i.e. users having to install .NET). As long as it runs smoothly on Vista and up, I'm happy.
The application
The software will teach basic physics to kids. I'd like to create a main area and a sidebar. The main area will feature a physics animation, say a bouncing ball, along with some Q&A. Users can zoom in to the animation to measure some stuff and answer the question. Users can track their progress in the sidebar. That's pretty much it.
What I've found so far
I'm getting a bit frustrated with MSDN. Most of their examples are given in four different languages (C#, C++, etc). I can't seem to get more than a bit of Hello World code from them.
I found a GDI API on MSDN and it seems like a good start for me. However I've read quite a few answers on SO saying creating layouts in pure C++ is really hard, that we're better of using frameworks like ATL and WTL. Since I'm also going to create (somewhat interactive) animations, I've wondered whether I should use gaming-targeted APIs like Direct2D.
Since all of this is new to me, and there are a lot of options, I don't know where to start for my particular application. Any tips would be greatly appreciated!
Using the raw Win32 API (no additional downloads or third-party helpers):
Here's a good primer (introduces dialog boxes, text boxes, buttons, etc): theForger's Win32 API Tutorial
And here's where you go from there (numeric up-downs, list boxes, combo boxes, tooltips, and more): Common Controls on MSDN. Most of these require you to #include <commctrl.h>.
I also found this to be a good resource that covered what the other two didn't: Win32 Developer - Window Assets
But the Win32 API doesn't seem like it does exactly what you want. A physics app for kids should have a more visual GUI than the API can provide. Good luck, though!
If you're ok with adding additional Frameworks, I'd suggest looking at Qt.
It allows to create the GUI from code only, has a good structure, and has an Interface for 2D drawing, if required.
If you are concerned about dependencies, you only have to include the Qt DLLs to your executables; no installation is required for the user.
To get started, see my (old) tutorial "Lessons in Windows API Programming".
But you really need a good book, such as edition 5 or earlier of Charles Petzold's classic "Programming Windows".
The problem with latest edition is that it's for C# and .NET, with Charles grabbing the tail of the "new way" at just the wrong time…
Disclaimer: I haven't checked the details of edition numbers.
Using the Windows API is the simplest, but producing advanced GUIs can take a very long time. Microsoft Foundation Class is a way to make the Windows API more user friendly and OOP. Does anyone have any experience with MFC?
Why not use some 2D C++ game engine, like HGE: http://hge.relishgames.com/overview.html.
I have recently read MFC Internals (ISBN 9780201407211) and it helped me greatly gain an intimate understanding of how MFC works and increased productivity about 100 fold. I was wondering now that I am into Qt, is there any book or documentation out there like this? I have been having a hard time finding straight-up documentation on Qt, it always seems to be beat-around=the-bush style of documentation (they tell you how to build the house, but not how to cut down the tree) ??
The best way is to try developing your own application. Just start from a basic application like calculator. Add a few widgets to it and code it as you go. For reference use "C++ gui programming with Qt4" mentioned by Zlatomir. I have recently designed a whole GUI using Qt. I drew its screenshots on Inkscape to get a prototype look and afterwards I started working on designer to fulfill each functionality. Then I implemented the code and I repeated the designing and coding steps. Also, the best help will be Qt Assistant - its sufficiently complete, no Internet required so save times and simple to use. Going my way, you will not only learn Qt in short interval after which you can go through the book to know what tips and tricks you might not know, but also it will be interesting so that you may not give up like many others who just fall midway through the reading part. Warning - Doing this way, you will also know about pitfalls/drawbacks of Qt and how to not go that way.
This is one of the links I found last night. I went through 2 pages and found it might make your life a bit easier - http://zetcode.com/gui/qt4/
I have not read the MFC book you mentioned, but the Qt framework i learned by reading from "C++ gui programming with Qt4" (the first edition is available as a free download) and "Foundation of Qt development" and also it's worth mentioning this documentation page, that contains links to the basic concepts of Qt framework.
A few colleagues and I created a simple packet capturing application based on libpcap, GTK+ and sqlite as a project for a Networks Engineering course at our university. While it (mostly) works, I am trying to improve my programming skills and would appreciate it if members of the community could look at what we've put together.
Is this a good place to ask for such a review? If not, what are good sites I can throw this question up on? The source code is hosted by Google Code (http://code.google.com/p/nbfm-sniffer) and an executable is available for download (Windows only, though it does compile on Linux and should compile on OS X Leopard as well provided one has gtk+ SDK installed).
Thanks, everyone!
-Carlos Nunez
UPDATE: Thanks for the great feedback, everyone. The code is completely open-source and modifiable (licensed under Apache License 2.0). I was hoping to get more holistic feedback, considering that my postings would still be very lengthy.
As sheepsimulator mentioned, GitHub is good. I would also recommend posting your project on SourceForge.net and/or FreshMeat.net. Both are active developer communities where people often peruse projects like yours. The best thing for your code would be if someone found it useful and decided to extend it. Then, you'd probably end up with plenty of bug fixes and constructive criticism.
You might get some mileage by posting the code out in the public space (through github or some other open-posting forum), putting a link here on SO, and seeing what happens.
You could also make it an open-source project, and see if people find it and use it.
Probably your best bet is to talk to your prof/classmates, find some professional programmers willing to devote their time, and have them review the code. Like American Idol-esque judging, but for your software...
As #Noah states, this is not the site for code review. You may present problems and what you did to overcome those problems, asking if a given solution would be the best.
I found a neat little website that might be what you are looking for: Cplusplus.com
Is Qt an interesting platform for business apps development, outside of Nokia phones ?
Why ? Strong points ?
Thanks
I like Qt because:
Very well-designed framework, e.g. signal-slot, model-view, graphics view/scene/item/proxy, painter/paint device/paint engine..., too many to be listed here!
Excellent documentation!
Cross platform language/API, as well as tools like UI designer, creator, and so on.
Rich features, e.g. graphics framework, network library, database engine, and so on.
Active community, and active development.
There should be more. If you have ever used it, you'll find it's easy to build your framework upon Qt.
I didn't have any complain to Qt. If I have to say at least one disadvantage here, "convention". You must adopt the convention of Qt, e.g. You have to use moc to make the meta object of your objects, and it's easier for developers to use Qt's vector, list, auto_ptr than STL, tr1. But I never found any issue caused by that. On the contrary, it works very well.
In my opinion, Qt is the state-of-the-art C++ framework in this modern world!
P.S. There are a lot of commercial applications built on Qt. You can find it under Qt's official website. But I'd like add one more here: Perforce, one of the top commercial source code management tools, built its client tool on Qt for Windows/Linux/Mac.
yes it is .. just look at kde apps :)
or see more applications made by qt
and it has alot of bindings in many languages
Documentation
cross-Platform IDE
further reading
may be this is not so related to the question ... but my first deal with qt was just great starting from their well organized Documentation to their great widgets
the GraphicsView is just ammazing ! :)
It's about the only current/modern C++ gui library on Windows.
MFC is so old you have to write comments in Latin
WTL would be nice if they had finished it before abandoning it.
Winforms/WPF + managed C++/CLR - all the fun of several incompatible new technologies at once.
Bad points:
To fit on lots of platforms they have invented their own solutions to things that are now in the STL/Boost
The signal/slot mechanism - tricky to debug and silently fails (with no error) with simple typos.
Although everything is possible it's sometimes a lot of effort to do simple things (they do love MVC) compared to Winforms.
Qt is simple
Qt is powerful
Qt is NATIVELY-CROSS-PLATFORM
Qt is REALLY-CROSS-PLATFORM
Qt is comprehensive (but the Media side of it still needs to grow)
Qt doesn't require Garbage Collection, but it embeds a GREAT model of memory management that makes you forget about memory deallocation
Qt is solid
Qt is modern
Qt proposes some new paradigm of programming that are really good (Signals-Slots)
Qt runs a lot of VERY successful software: (Skype, Google Earth...)
Are those points strong enough?
Maybe you have heard about Google Earth which happens to be programmed in Qt too.
That aside, I like Qt for my in-house development because it
is very well supported and documented,
allows me to write simple and decent-looking apps that are
works cross-platform for Windows and Linux with little effort, and
contains nice to have components for database access, regexps, guis, xml, ...
I also use the Qwt widgets for easy real-time plotting on top of Qt.
I really dont understand whats the point in underestimating tools/frameworks which makes things easy for programmers. Qt is too good for GUI development, I would say its much better than any current existing crossplatform app development suite.
So many advantages, I have been using it for more than three years now for a product to be deployed in Linux/Win environments. The app is thread intensive and initially we had a tough time using pthreads and its conterpart for windows. Then we switched to Qt(and QThreads eventually) and things were a breeze...
Backed by active development, a highly helpful and supportive community along with excellent documentation, training, certification programs, videos, forums... its easy, fast and effective to develop in Qt. You should see the video which they create a web browser in just five mins!
Its really 'cross platform', and it doesnt have a software wrapper(like Java does) to enable this which makes it faster. Cmon, we all know java apps have buttons which takes a second to respond to even a simple 'click'.
I hope Qt will someday do a take on Java. :D
after all, 350000 developers cant be wrong when they chose Qt.
Pixar uses Qt (or at least, used, as of 2005) internally for certain parts of their tool suite (called "Marionette" in the marketing) collectively called Menv, ("men-vee" for Modelling ENVironment)---at least for their lighting sub-tool Lumos.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I have to choose a platform for our product. I have to decide between The Qt Framework and Adobe's AIR. I am well versed with Qt as I have worked for the last two years. I looked up at the Adobe's site but all the info about flex, flash, ability to coding in HTML/ActionScript is overwhelming and confusing. I cannot understand the following about the Adobe ecosystem.
I have the following questions on Adobe AIR:
What language do I use for coding my application? (not just defining the looks of UI)
Like in Qt I use C++. Is it Actionscript?
Can we say AIR is only for making UI's for apps.
Where is the doc for the utility classes along with AIR?
e.g. http://qt-project.org/doc/ for Qt
Qt ships with a huge set of premade widgets that one can use. Does Adobe ship with any such widget set and if so where can i see it as in url?
I understand flex SDK is open source. Can I make commerical apps and ship them ? Does flex SDK ship everything (compiler, utility classes/widgets)
How much does AIR cost in terms of licensing?
Is there something in AIR that is equivalent to QGraphicsView of QT?
If you needs to access a lot of native libraries, you'll need to stay within your QT environment. Keep in mind that AIR is single-threaded and is run on the Flash Player (something that was originally designed for frame-based animations.)
However, depending on the style of application you're building, AIR might suit you just fine.
Beware that AIR can get confusing because there's a few different developer paths to creating AIR applications: 1) using html/javascript and the AIR SDK, 2) using Flash/Actionscript and 3) using Flex SDK and/or Flex builder. The last one is the most capable as far as coming from traditional desktop development background.
Small apps that are Web 2.0 for hooking into web services are good candidates for AIR applications. Things like the IM client Digsby would be great. My favorite AIR app that I've seen thus far is Basamiq Mockups. Other useful apps are TweetDeck. These are good examples of the types of things that are well-suited to solve with AIR.
You should visit the Adobe Showcase and look at some applications: http://www.adobe.com/products/air/showcase/
Also, if you're looking to just get out of the C++ game, I believe QT has some java bindings now...also I remember some python bindings, but never look at those myself.
As far as QGraphicsView, people have done similar things in Flex. I tried Googling right now but couldn't find them initially, but people have taken things like A large image, and then only displayed a current region in the window. Also, in the next version of Flex, they're acutaly building an official ViewPort component:
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Gumbo+Viewport
Go spend some time with this AIR application and then ask yourself if Adobe Flex and AIR are worth investing your time in mastering (be prepared to ask yourself why something comparable doesn't exist for the likes of C++/QT):
Tour de Flex
Tour de Flex is a desktop application
for exploring Flex capabilities and
resources, including the core Flex
components, Adobe AIR and data
integration, as well as a variety of
third-party components, effects,
skins, and more.
Some of your questions:
Flex can be coded in MXML and
ActionScript3. AIR additionally
supports HTML/DOM/JavaScript
programming as webkit HTML render engine is built into
the AIR runtime.
MXML is an XML declarative DSL that
gets compiled into ActionScript3
imperative code. It is quite good,
though, for declaratively coding the
graphical forms of the UI (i.e., the
views of the MVC pattern).
ActionScript3 has a heratige that is
founded on JavaScript, but it has
been embelished to the point it more
resembles Java or C#. It has package
namespace, classes and interfaces
with inheritance, class member
access protection keywords,
constructors, static members, and
some very nice additions over Java:
properties, events, data-binding,
and closures.
Flex style programming is also a single-threaded model that relies on asynchronous I/O interactions. This is a simpler model to program than multi-threaded Java Swing or C# .NET Winform apps, yet permits achieving the same net results of program behavior. I elaborate on that here:
Flex Async I/O vs Java and C# Explicit Threading
Flex is open source, you can download the SDK for free, there are no licensing costs associated with it. (see their FAQ)
They do ship a 'flex builder', which is some custom Eclipse I think, and which costs money, but you can perfectly work without it.
The docs can be found at adobe's livedoc pages. (which to some, is enough reason in itself to dislike Adobe ;))
I do wonder, if you are well versed in QT, why are you considering something else? Which advantages do you expect AIR to give you over QT?
I have some experience with both QT and Flex, but not nearly enough to weight one versus the other. I do know QT/C++ is much, much more mature than Flex/ActionScript.
If you already know QT, I don't think the time spend learning a new framework (and programming language) will gain you enough to be honest...
I've used QT and Flex (not so much Air itself though) and have found that Flex is faster for getting apps up and running as well as modifying, while QT gives you more control -- particularly in the installer. The Air app installer is pretty awkward, or at least it was when I tried it, though it may have been improved since then.
The big advantage of Air is that much of the code for it can be run in Flash inside web pages. You can't access the local file system etc. from the web for security reasons but just about everything else is portable.
I made the opposite move. I started working on Adobe stuff and moved to QT. The main reason for doing it was about Adobe framework limitations. When you are using Adobe stuff, you are limited to the tools that they produce, it is hard to introduce external frameworks or libraries, if can not do what you want with Adobe stuff. Usually, the solution to do this is to use sockets, which transforms a supposed "stand-alone" application on a client-server architecture. In addition, if you are using many external stuff it can be hard to manage so many different clients.
Using QT you can code in C++ and add any external framework or lib you want. Even though, some times it can not be easy to code it, is doable and with no "strange" system architecture.
If your looking for some examples of "fun" UIs using Qt and SVG, take a look at the KDEGames [1][2] and KDEEdu [3][4] projects. There's lot's of nice code there that uses QGraphicsView and SVG to created scalable interfaces. Of course note that's it's GPL so be careful what you "borrow" if your app isn't.
[1] http://games.kde.org/
[2] http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdegames/
[3] http://edu.kde.org/
[4] http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdeedu/
I'll second #Pieter's comment - if you already know QT, moving to a whole new environment is going to take a LOT longer.
QT has the advantage of being cross-platform, and very mature: there are libraries for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. I'm not extremely familiar with AIR beyond knowing it's from Adobe, but the product site seems to indicate that it's for rich internet apps (http://www.adobe.com/products/air/). If that's true, then QT would be the far better choice if you're developing a desktop application.