• Jure Repinc@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    What’s wrong with it? It is basically invisible and all done automatically in the background by the build system.

    • Lembot_0001@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      The very fact of its existence. I would like to see Qt as a normal library, not a C+±breaking “framework”.

      • Jure Repinc@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        It does not break anything. Just uses C++ and builds upon it and improves it. And MOC comes in when some niceties are required that are hard to do with plain C++ (and be backwards compatible) or when more flexibility is required. If you know how to do it better, well Qt is free (as in freedom) and opensource and you can join the project and replace MOC with a better implementation. Until then it is a not so important detail and foolish to throw away entire Qt and all the numerous goodies and nice things that it brings just for this small detail.

        • Lembot_0001@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I don’t like the way how Qt “improves” C++. I don’t like moc. And I think that is enough reason to “throw away entire Qt”.