[lazarus] qt status?

Andrew Johnson acjgenius at earthlink.net
Sun Sep 14 18:19:53 EDT 2003

ok so googling and looking through all sorts of docs I find qtc and kdec
which apear to be mostly autogenerated files for c library translation
layer, eg libqtc.so (apears to even ship with newer RH). this might be
the easiest way to go to create fpc bindings to the c bindings library

This is definitely a kde driven effort, and since kde (and the qt it
uses) are gpl, it couldn't be used in commercial apps(btw how is that
going to be handled? the qt interface itself under gpl, and proper
warnings in the IDE upon selecting it?) It may not actually require
anything kde-wise since the kde and qt are abstracted from each other. I
am not sure of the impact on those who would like to use qt interface
itself cross-platform, since I am not sure of the compilability of these
libs seperate from kde, however either way it would work on just about
any of the *BSD and linux so I suppose thats good enough.

If this looks reasonable to other people I suppose I can grab qt and
then these sources and try and compile them here( I don't have kde
installed nor do I want to if I can get away with it for now ) and start
using h2c to try and generate headers and see how well it does sometime
in the next few weeks.

So Thoughts?


On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 13:45, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> alright. that sounds good. I will go look into that, and if moc _does_
> produces cohesive enough ones, such that we don't need to actually
> include any of the actual translations and upkeep them ourselves, it
> might make usage easier anyway, since we could just require moc and have
> a script to compile things properly and link resulting c objects and
> pascal objects and stuff, perhaps in a lazarus package like the gtk2
> one. And if not.. well we shall see. :)
> Andrew
> On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 13:24, Michael.VanCanneyt at Wisa.be wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Sep 2003, Marc Weustink wrote:
> > 
> > > At 14:03 14-9-2003, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> > > >Just wondering what the status on qt for pascal is, I don't use it or
> > > >like it but I expect a lot of people want it to be able to make there
> > > >apps targeted toward kde. awhile back it was mentioned that it shouldn't
> > > >be that hard now to get translated headers for qt3. Is this currently
> > > >still viable? or would an additional lib like originally implemented
> > > >still be the only way, either way what is the probability of getting the
> > > >interface for it on the roll again. I would very much like to see
> > > >lazarus running on gnome2/gtk2 kde3/qt3 and win32 by our 1.0 release,
> > > >which seems to be getting closer and closer now that things are
> > > >stabalizing even on win32.
> > >
> > > When we started QT was object based. That ment that every call had to be
> > > wrapped by a piece of C code to get a flat function call. I heard rumors
> > > (but don't know if they are true) that FPC could link against C++ objects
> > > so that the wrapper wasn't needed.
> > > If FCP would support this, it would be in the 1.1 or later versions.
> > > Unless the qt3 libs contain flat apicalls (which I don't expect) we still
> > > need the wrapper.
> > 
> > You still need the wrapper. But a C wrapper can be generated by Qt itself.
> > (using the 'moc' compiler tool if I'm right)
> > 
> > Michael.
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> >      To unsubscribe: mail lazarus-request at miraclec.com with
> >                 "unsubscribe" as the Subject
> >    archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
> _________________________________________________________________
>      To unsubscribe: mail lazarus-request at miraclec.com with
>                 "unsubscribe" as the Subject
>    archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives

More information about the Lazarus mailing list