Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Programming IT Technology

QT 4.5 Released, Plus New IDE and Analysis Tool 62

stoolpigeon writes "QT 4.5 has arrived and is now available for download. This new release is quite significant due to licensing changes that now make it simpler to use QT in a wider range of products without cost as well as a number of new features. The latest version of Webkit is now integrated into the product. Qt 4.5 sees the introduction of QtBenchLib, a new component to make measuring the performance of the toolkit and checking for regressions easier. Mac developers who use Qt will note a major reworking of 4.5 on the Mac, now providing 64-bit support. QT Creator is a new IDE that looks to have combined a number of previously separate tools. And there is much more."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

QT 4.5 Released, Plus New IDE and Analysis Tool

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Excellent. QuickTime from Apple is a great media viewer and I'm excited to see a new version released.
    Interesting that there's nothing on the website about it... hmm... it must be released "on the QT" ( )

  • Nice (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Qt is the most sensible C++ library I've ever used. And its sensibility reaches from string handling to the build process.

    It allows you to untangle the mess that raw C++ is, and actually use the power.

  • From native to web (Score:5, Informative)

    by arendjr ( 673589 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:09PM (#27051979) Homepage

    In a world that's moving fast from native application to web-based applications, I believe their bet in integrating WebKit is an excellent choice.

    At my company (a web company) we had to choose a platform for our native client and basically the choice boiled down to Mozilla's XUL platform, Adobe AIR and (just in time) Qt with WebKit. We decided for the latter and do not regret it!

    While QtWebKit has a lot of rough edges in Qt 4.4, I believe there is a *lot* of potential, especially given the huge improvements they made in that area in Qt 4.5. JavaScript has seen a huge speed bump due to the SquirrelFish engine, you can expose C++ objects to JavaScript (already in 4.4), and with some work you can even connect native Qt signals to JavaScript methods, there now is support for HTML5 and CSS3 transformations. Without exaggeration, this really is the best of both worlds.

    And now with the LGPL license option it's even available to about everyone who wants it. Good job!

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I dont get it, how do you port native code to the web? does it compile to some kind of html+js? or is it just using web stuff directly in the widgets of a native app?
      • by arendjr ( 673589 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @01:09PM (#27052887) Homepage

        It's the latter. You can just use web controls as part of a native application. Basically you can just create a native application window, and render its entire contents using HTML/CSS. Or just a part of the window if you like. And all JavaScript code in those web parts can just call back to your native code where needed.

        And the other way around is also possible. You can embed native controls into your web view just like how you embed a Flash object into a web page. And again, there's no problem in communicating between native code and JavaScript. Though if you want to pass complex data structures you will likely want to pass those as JSON objects (which in turn can be easily mapped to and from QVariantMaps, if you Google around you will find plenty solutions for that).

    • by Cyberax ( 705495 )

      There's also a nice project called HTMLayout - it's a VERY lightweight HTML engine with support for native widgets and rich CSS styling (far far better than in QT).

      It would be nice to see it integrated with QT one day :)

    • by pembo13 ( 770295 )

      I am very much not a fan of this move to web based everything. I like having web interfaces to things. But I hate only having web interfaces. Even more I hate the idea that one day I may have none of my own data on my own machine. Having the option is fine, but that option seems to be slowly disappearing.

    • In a world that's moving fast from native application to web-based applications, I believe their bet in integrating WebKit is an excellent choice.

      WebKit certainly has the benefit of having many more people contributing to its development. KHTML was the start, but for better or for worse WebKit is where it is at.

      BTW When will Konquerer make use of WebKit?

      • The webkit kpart is, I'd say, something like 98% usable now. I don't use konq all that much, but it's in a solid enough state that I've set webkit as the default for rendering webpages.
    • If you like C++ and the Qt API and you want to develop for the web (true web 2.0 AJAX apps), you should try Wt [].

      Wt clones the Qt API but using Boost instead of Qt. You can compile your web application to a FastCGI module (which you can deploy with Apache, lighttpd, IIS, etc) or to an executable which includes an embedded HTTP(S) web server.

      Oh, and there are Ruby bindings [], too (code [])

      Oh, and best of all: you can link to any C and C++ library (including Qt). No more messing with Ruby/Python/PHP/whatever binding

  • by MrHanky ( 141717 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:13PM (#27052059) Homepage Journal

    Using Qt 4.5-rc1 from Debian Experimental and the Arora browser [], I get 98/100 on Acid 3. It renders pretty fast as well.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by IceFox ( 18179 )
      After the rc was released the last fixes went in so 4.5.0 QtWebKit gets 100/100 on the acid3 test.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by ardor ( 673957 )

        99/100 here, using the official 4.5 release. Apparently, the link test fails.

    • by westyvw ( 653833 )
      Thats odd, using Webkit from Sid with Midori I get 100/100.
  • by Maxwell42 ( 594898 ) <<olivier.jaquemet> <at> <>> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:40PM (#27052453)

    And for those like me who were quite excited with the new licensing and wanted to use it with java... Don't think of it...

    Qt Jambi - a port of Qt to the Java programming language - has been discontinued in order to focus resources on the Qt cross platform application and UI framework. Qt Jambi will be maintained for one year after the March 2009 release of Qt Jambi 4.5.0_01, and will be made available upon release under the LGPL license

    QT Programming Language Support []

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by zebslash ( 1107957 )

      Well, you forgot to paste the next paragraph:

      To help faciliate the continued development of Qt Jambi, Qt Software will host and help maintain a community-driven Qt Jambi implementation.

      So it is not completely ditched, it relies on the community to maintain it.

      • We'll see in the long term if there are people willing to maintain it...
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Carewolf ( 581105 )

          PyQt and several other Qt-bindings are community maintained, and I think there are more Java users in the world than the Python users. I could be wrong though, or the Java users could all be corporate slaves and not interested in free software development. Still I would put my money on Jambi surviving.

          • by pembo13 ( 770295 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @03:06PM (#27054667) Homepage

            PyQt is also currently in the middle of nowhere. And PyQt, as far as I can tell, isn't really community maintained. Its a very small group of guys doing all the work, and who as of yet haven't come to a decision on what will happen to the project now that the little revenue they got from commercial licensing will likely dry up.

            I was hoping that Qt would actual pull in more projects and not drop them.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Simon ( 815 )

            PyQt is developed as a commercial product which is available under a closed source license and under the GPL plus the other FOSS licenses that Qt itself used before the recent change to LGPL.


          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            It's a very small niche. I suspect the reason for the 'community-driven' spin-off is that Jambi has received a lukewarm response from commercial developers (who, until now, haven't had the benefit of LGPL).

            Java has an extensive range of established frameworks and for UI toolkits Swing and SWT. I, and evidently Nokia, can't see the business case for adopting Jambi. Ignoring the technical details, it's much easier to assemble a team of experienced Swing developers.

            I'm a Java developer by trade. If a project I

            • Wish I could mod you up. This desire to just write in any language, be it javascript, php or C++ and then mix it all togther in one project is not a good thing, imho. It's brought forward a generation of "coders" who never learned the basics of software engineering and write software that reflects that lack.

      • The guys at Qt don't have an infinite budget.

        Some of the ideas work really well and are adopted in the marketplace (Qt's Designer), but others (like Jambi) die because no one uses them. It's natural and healthy. Besides, if anyone really does find it useful and wants to use it and extend it, Qt has left the license in such a way as to say "Go for it!"

        Jambi's changing status, I think, is due to Java's evolution as THE backend language for server heavy processing things like databases (Oracle) or massively

        • by Simon ( 815 )

          Jambi's changing status, I think, is due to Java's evolution as THE backend language for server heavy processing things like databases (Oracle) or massively parallel scientific computations. At the same time, Java isn't used for graphical applications nearly as much as it was back in say '99.

          Jambi tried to solve the problem with Java (namely the UI libraries are terrible), but maybe it was too late?

          I don't think that is really the case. I remember being at a Java conference for work once and there being a show of hands. Half of the developers attending were server side (and web), and other client side.

          The main reason why Jambi probably didn't catch on, IMHO, is that Swing is standard in Java and is much much more established, regardless of its flaws.


        • Jambi tried to solve the problem with Java (namely the UI libraries are terrible), but maybe it was too late?

          It's far from an abandoned space. Jambi/Qt faces the opposite problem: trying to take market share away from two large, popular GUI application frameworks: Netbeans and Eclipse RCP. Eclipse RCP is already well-established as the platform of choice for Java programmers who want to build GUI applications using native widgets. GUI applications framework have a significant learning curve, so the uptake of Jambi/Qt among Java programmers will be gradual at best.

          As the developer of a commercial Eclipse RCP a

  • Awesome (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sjones130 ( 1491221 ) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:47PM (#27052565)
    This is great. I was a GTK+ advocate back in '05. I recently changed over to QT4 (this past weekend infact) and I kept saying to myself "This really needs a good IDE, something like VS".. and here it is. This saves me having to use Eclipse (which I can't stand). woot!
  • GCC 3.4.5 (Score:3, Informative)

    by PhrostyMcByte ( 589271 ) <> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @01:40PM (#27053315) Homepage
    Wow, blast from the past with errors compiling standard C++ I haven't had to worry about for a long time. The Windows bundle package comes with MinGW GCC 3.4.5 built in January 2006. TDM's GCC builds [] to the rescue!
  • Does anyone know if there are plans to offer the LGPL licensing option for PyQT Python bindings? Typically they have followed QT licensing, but I could see that it wouldn't necessarily be in their best interest to offer LGPL. Of course, if they don't someone could just fork it and put them out of business anyway...
    • I'd asked Riverbank that very question. I was told they were evaluating it, but would make no commitments either way just yet.

      So, at least they are thinking about it.

    • by pembo13 ( 770295 )

      The people in charge have not yet commented. And I was just getting interested in Jambi as well. But Qt is dropping it to the community.

    • You can't fork GPL code into an LGPL licence. If you want LGPL code and the original developer doesn't agree, you will have to rewrite it from scratch.

  • QT ftw (Score:2, Informative)

    by sapelko ( 1281580 )
    As much as I like gtk+ and gnome apps better, I've been using QT for a while and it really is a joy to use, years ahead of any other toolkit in terms of features and elegance
  • Qt is now Cocoa, that is how they added 64bit support. They already had plans for Cocoa but Apple's move as ''If you want 64bit GUI, you need Cocoa'' made them move faster. That is how Apple pushes developers I guess.

    It is huge news for OS X, both Developers and Users. Imagine Cocoa Opera, Google Earth, Skype etc. and even the entire KDE 4.

    While there was a lot of FUD against Carbon I don't agree, I guess a Cocoa based Qt will end a lot of bad feedback about Qt based apps on OS X, especially text rendering?

  • Is it still tied to C++ like in the previews or are they supporting other languages/bindings now?

I was playing poker the other night... with Tarot cards. I got a full house and 4 people died. -- Steven Wright