| Trolltech Home | Qt-interest Home | Recent Threads | All Threads | Author | Date | |
| All threads index page 3 | |
It's been about 7 months since the 32/64 Carbon announcement, and Leopard has been shipping for awhile. Has there been any word on 64 bit Qt compatibility with Leopard? -- [ signature omitted ]
On Wednesday 13 February 2008 16:13:54 Paul Miller wrote: > It's been about 7 months since the 32/64 Carbon announcement, and > Leopard has been shipping for awhile. Has there been any word on 64 bit > Qt compatibility with Leopard? You can build 32-bit GUI applications in Leopard and deploy them anywhere starting with Qt 4.3.3. (Unless you use OpenGL, but that's because the Mac headers changed in a binary-incompatible fashion -- use Qt 4.3.4 if you use OpenGL) You can also build 64-bit non-GUI applications on MacOS X without issues. As for 64-bit GUI applications, we're working on it. But we have no time-frame right now. The port to Cocoa will happen, but it's still in research phase. If you need a solution fast, you should complain to Apple. It's their fault. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Wednesday 13 February 2008 16:13:54 Paul Miller wrote: >> It's been about 7 months since the 32/64 Carbon announcement, and >> Leopard has been shipping for awhile. Has there been any word on 64 bit >> Qt compatibility with Leopard? > > You can build 32-bit GUI applications in Leopard and deploy them anywhere > starting with Qt 4.3.3. (Unless you use OpenGL, but that's because the Mac > headers changed in a binary-incompatible fashion -- use Qt 4.3.4 if you use > OpenGL) > > You can also build 64-bit non-GUI applications on MacOS X without issues. > > As for 64-bit GUI applications, we're working on it. But we have no time-frame > right now. The port to Cocoa will happen, but it's still in research phase. Okay, I was aware of this. I was just wondering if anything had changed. I fully understand the effort you are facing. > If you need a solution fast, you should complain to Apple. It's their fault. Agreed. But I can't remember the last time complaining to Apple actually changed anything. On a related note - I've had to integrate some C++ and Cocoa code using the Objective C++ compiler and it was surprisingly straightforward. Hopefully you'll discover that reimplementing the Mac-specific side using Cocoa isn't as hard as it sounds. If we're lucky. -- [ signature omitted ]
If only it were that easy. The Trolls are being forced to use a totally different native GUI API that behind the scenes works in very different ways. I really feel their pain since Apple actually included full 64-bit Carbon GUI support in the developer previews before Leopard was finally released. Pulling it back at the last second, after they built the darn thing, was really cruel. :-( On a happier note, I'm really looking forward to seeing the 4.4 tree stabilize and 4.4 getting out the door. It may not have 64 bit GUI goodness for OSX but I can vouch that they've really sped up widget creation and painting in general. Now if only they can fix all the stability issues I ran into. :-) -Will On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Paul Miller <paul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On Wednesday 13 February 2008 16:13:54 Paul Miller wrote: > >> It's been about 7 months since the 32/64 Carbon announcement, and > >> Leopard has been shipping for awhile. Has there been any word on 64 bit > >> Qt compatibility with Leopard? > > > > You can build 32-bit GUI applications in Leopard and deploy them anywhere > > starting with Qt 4.3.3. (Unless you use OpenGL, but that's because the Mac > > headers changed in a binary-incompatible fashion -- use Qt 4.3.4 if you use > > OpenGL) > > > > You can also build 64-bit non-GUI applications on MacOS X without issues. > > > > As for 64-bit GUI applications, we're working on it. But we have no time-frame > > right now. The port to Cocoa will happen, but it's still in research phase. > > Okay, I was aware of this. I was just wondering if anything had changed. > I fully understand the effort you are facing. > > > > If you need a solution fast, you should complain to Apple. It's their fault. > > Agreed. But I can't remember the last time complaining to Apple actually > changed anything. > > On a related note - I've had to integrate some C++ and Cocoa code using > the Objective C++ compiler and it was surprisingly straightforward. > Hopefully you'll discover that reimplementing the Mac-specific side > using Cocoa isn't as hard as it sounds. If we're lucky. > > > > -- > Paul Miller | paul@xxxxxxxxxx | www.fxtech.com | Got Tivo? > > -- > To unsubscribe - send a mail to qt-interest-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject or the body. > List archive and information: http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/ > > -- [ signature omitted ]
Will Stokes wrote: >Now if only they can fix all the stability issues I ran into. :-) If it's a small issue, please post to qt4-preview-feedback, along with any comments on the API, suggestions on how to use, etc. If it's a crash, compilation issue, memory leak, dataloss, just plain brokenness, please report to Trolltech Support as soon as you can. We still have time to fix bugs before the final release, but unless you guys report, we may never find them. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Wednesday 13 February 2008 16:22:29 Thiago Macieira wrote: > As for 64-bit GUI applications, we're working on it. But we have no > time-frame right now. The port to Cocoa will happen, but it's still in > research phase. > > If you need a solution fast, you should complain to Apple. It's their > fault. Ok, I shouldn't have been so harsh. I apologise. It is Apple's doing. But we are doing what we can to shield our clients and users from Apple's breakages (there was more than one with Leopard). Our intention is obviously for you guys to have a painless migration from one version to another. But the migration to 64-bit requires a lot more work. It requires scrapping all of our Carbon code and write it in Objective C with Cocoa. And since we want you to have a seamless migration, without regressions, we have to work hard to make sure everything works, looks and feels exactly the same way. For that reason, it's going to take some time. Hopefully, we will have more news soon. For the moment, you'll have to trust me that things are progressing. And that it will not be part of Qt 4.4. -- [ signature omitted ]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.