You are not logged in.

A few questions

Dear visitor, welcome to QtForum.org. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

pcLoadLetter

Beginner

  • "pcLoadLetter" started this thread

Posts: 3

  • Send private message

1

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 12:37am

A few questions

I am just starting out learning QT, and I have a few questions.

1. I get compiler warnings when using the compiler that came with VS.net 2003 on the command line and when using the IDE it doesn't recognize the qt library header files at all. The tiny programs that I have copied run like they should but I am not in the habit of ignoring warnings. As for the IDE, I installed QT exactly like it said to in the QT book, and yes I check the QTDIR option. I am not too concerned about the IDE, as I really don't like using it, but the warnings make me nervous. Any ideas? Here are the warnings:

LINK : warning LNK4199: /DELAYLOAD:comdlg32.dll ignored; no imports found from c
omdlg32.dll
LINK : warning LNK4199: /DELAYLOAD:oleaut32.dll ignored; no imports found from o
leaut32.dll
LINK : warning LNK4199: /DELAYLOAD:winmm.dll ignored; no imports found from winm
m.dll
LINK : warning LNK4199: /DELAYLOAD:wsock32.dll ignored; no imports found from ws
ock32.dll
LINK : warning LNK4199: /DELAYLOAD:winspool.dll ignored; no imports found from w
inspool.dll

2. The book, the one in the Bruce Perens series, had the non-commercial windows version. Any app that I compile, it has [non-commercial] at the top, where the name of the app should be. This is quite annoying, is there any way to get rid of it?

3. I am assuming that the non-commercial edition has the same terms as the open source one for linux, except for the fact I can not redistrubute the QT program, but I can distribute my programs under the GPL or whatever? Am I correct? I don't have a problem releasing any of the stuff I do under open source, but if I am wrong and I can't distribute my own apps, then I will have to look elsewhere for a decent cross platform gui API. The commercial version is stupid expensive. I can do pretty much anything I want with my apps written under VS .net pro and even a retail version of that is cheaper, and comes with much more then a gui API. I just don't want to tie myself to closely to Microsoft.

4. Since QT is designed to be cross platform, are there any incompatibilities between compiling with the non-commercial version and then compiling the same source under linux? Sorry for so many questions about my windows version, I didn't see anything on the website that mentions it.

Thanks in advance

wysota

Sage

  • "wysota" is male

Posts: 4,276

Location: Warsaw, POLAND

  • Send private message

2

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 12:58am

RE: A few questions

Quoted

Originally posted by pcLoadLetter
I am just starting out learning QT, and I have a few questions.

1. I get compiler warnings when using the compiler that came with VS.net 2003 on the command line and when using the IDE it doesn't recognize the qt library header files at all.


This is quite normal. It just means that you tried to link with a library, which wasn't needed for a particular project, and it was ignored (you can call it an optimisation ;P).

Quoted


2. The book, the one in the Bruce Perens series, had the non-commercial windows version. Any app that I compile, it has [non-commercial] at the top, where the name of the app should be. This is quite annoying, is there any way to get rid of it?


Yes, buy a licence (commercial/academic/educational) or wait for Qt4 GPL for Windows.

Quoted


3. I am assuming that the non-commercial edition has the same terms as the open source one for linux, except for the fact I can not redistrubute the QT program, but I can distribute my programs under the GPL or whatever? Am I correct? I don't have a problem releasing any of the stuff I do under open source, but if I am wrong and I can't distribute my own apps, then I will have to look elsewhere for a decent cross platform gui API. The commercial version is stupid expensive. I can do pretty much anything I want with my apps written under VS .net pro and even a retail version of that is cheaper, and comes with much more then a gui API. I just don't want to tie myself to closely to Microsoft.


Unfortunately you're wrong. The way I see it, you can't distribute files from this 3.2NC editon, so you can't distribute binary apps made with it (as obviously they won't work without the library itself). When Qt4 finally comes, you'll be able to distribute your Windoze apps under regular GPL terms. As for now GPL is only available as an option to choose for Unix versions of Qt.

BTW. Qt is not just a GUI api too you know...

Quoted


4. Since QT is designed to be cross platform, are there any incompatibilities between compiling with the non-commercial version and then compiling the same source under linux? Sorry for so many questions about my windows version, I didn't see anything on the website that mentions it.


Only the ones connected to the compiler you use -- like Win32 MSVC not knowing round(), floor() and a bunch of other functions, including many of POSIX ones too of course (and WinAPI is not available on linux :P). The framework itself is completely transparent (with only one exception -- ActiveX for Windows and session management for X).

Quoted

Thanks in advance

You're welcome :)
QtCentre.org - the largest Qt community site and forum where questions get answered

pcLoadLetter

Beginner

  • "pcLoadLetter" started this thread

Posts: 3

  • Send private message

3

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 3:40am

Thank you very much, you saved me from wasting a lot of time. I guess I will have to look elswhere or stick with what is in VS .net or write the gui in java, although I would hate to do that, as much as I like java, I dislike the gui libraries.

The academic version seems nearly as worthless as the NC version. As for buying a commercial license, I would have to be a retard to spend $1790 for the windows version and that much again for a linux license, just for the privilege of being able to do whatever I wish with the programs I write. :rolleyes:

Perhaps I might take a look at v4 when it comes out, but by then I need to have a few projects I am working on completed, so it is still a waste for me.

oh, well. I hope B&N won't give me too much grief returning the book.

Thanks again.

hatulflezet

Professional

Posts: 1,301

Location: Munich Germany

Occupation: Programmer

  • Send private message

4

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 8:31am

Quoted

The academic version seems nearly as worthless as the NC version. As for buying a commercial license, I would have to be a retard to spend $1790 for the windows version and that much again for a linux license, just for the privilege of being able to do whatever I wish with the programs I write. roll eyes

Excuse me for barging in - but -
The license youre paying for is not to do what ever you like with the programs YOU wrote, but with the excelent code TROLLTECH coders wrote.
You can write YOUR own GUI lib, and pay $0 for it, even better - you can then charge others for it.
The trolls IMHO did an excelent job, and, they DO offer QT as GPL under linux, and will again under windows with QT4.
Much more then I can say for other big Radmond company...

However, search the forum, or google for the GPL QT port for windows.
There is such a thing with out the need of Cygwin (its not done by trolltech - but it works great).
Click here! I dare ya'!! :]
Project Archimedes
----------------------------------------------------------
"Don't panic, and thanks for all the fish!"

pcLoadLetter

Beginner

  • "pcLoadLetter" started this thread

Posts: 3

  • Send private message

5

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 6:23pm

I was only planning on using it for the gui parts of my program, so yes, MY PROGRAM. If you use the C++ STL in your program, is your program all of a sudden not yours anymore? I guess that means that no programmer writes his own programs, they must all belong to library writers. Libraries are a useful tool, but in the end the libraries are not your program. Yes, I can write my own cross-platform gui library, just like I can write my own string, mathematics or networking library, and I have, and many more. It is my opinion that no matter what language you learn, if all you learn is the language and its library, including 3rd party libraries, you are a poor excuse for a programmer. A good programmer can write any class/function, including any needed assembler, that exists in the libraries he/she uses. Of course it would be silly to do so, but anyone who calls themselves a programmer should be able to do it.

GUIs are not that important to me, granted most end users never think beyond the GUI, but it is a rather insignificant and uninteresting part of a program. For that I should have to wait however long it takes them to release QT4 before I can distrubute the programs I WROTE under any license, including GPL, or fork out $1800 for a program that is worth $100, tops?


Sorry I will pass.

I am looking at wxWidgets now, as it seems to be well designed, and <gasp> I can release what I write along with any required library files when and how I want.

The reason I am trying to avoid sticking with a MS solution is because I wanted to be able to easily move between windows and linux, and trying yourself to MS only incurs extra costs and headaches. QT appears to share many of the same problems.

chickenblood

Professional

Posts: 657

Location: Mountain View, CA

Occupation: Data Monkey

  • Send private message

6

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 6:57pm

Quoted

Originally posted by pcLoadLetter
GUIs are not that important to me, granted most end users never think beyond the GUI, but it is a rather insignificant and uninteresting part of a program.


Well that says it all there. Qt is not for you. If you think that the GUI to your program is 'insignificant and uninteresting' then probably nobody will use it anyway.

Quoted


For that I should have to wait however long it takes them to release QT4 before I can distrubute the programs I WROTE under any license, including GPL, or fork out $1800 for a program that is worth $100, tops?


Qt targets over 3 major platforms and consists of a team of nearly 100 programmers, providing expertise in not only GUI, but networking, databases, XML and graphics. It may be on the expensive side yes, but to say it's worth '$100 tops' is just delusional.

Quoted


I am looking at wxWidgets now, as it seems to be well designed, and <gasp> I can release what I write along with any required library files when and how I want.


I wish you lots of luck and I mean that. I evaluated wxWindows/wsWidgets about 2 years ago for my company, along with GTK, MainWin, and Qt. We decided to fork out the cash for Qt because it was far and away the best solution. wxWidgets may be a whole lot better now (and is admitedly a great achievement for one or two guys), but at the time:

It was poorly and incompletely documented.
It was slow.
It had many 'features' and platform-specific code that you had to write to get a uniform behaviour.

On the other hands it may fit your needs for what you want to do, YMMV.

Quoted


The reason I am trying to avoid sticking with a MS solution is because I wanted to be able to easily move between windows and linux, and trying yourself to MS only incurs extra costs and headaches. QT appears to share many of the same problems.


Not really, but hey.
I have enough sense to know that "common sense" is an oxymoron.

anda_skoa

Master

Posts: 2,162

Location: Graz, Austria

Occupation: Student

  • Send private message

7

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 7:43pm

RE: A few questions

Quoted

Originally posted by pcLoadLetter
3. I am assuming that the non-commercial edition has the same terms as the open source one for linux, except for the fact I can not redistrubute the QT program, but I can distribute my programs under the GPL or whatever?

You can if you add an extra clause that you allow linking to the non-commercial version, otherwise the GPL would forbid that.

There are already a couple of threads about this in the Offtopic section if you need any details.

Cheers,
_
Qt/KDE Developer
Debian User

wysota

Sage

  • "wysota" is male

Posts: 4,276

Location: Warsaw, POLAND

  • Send private message

8

Wednesday, March 30th 2005, 8:12pm

Quoted

Originally posted by pcLoadLetter
I was only planning on using it for the gui parts of my program, so yes, MY PROGRAM.

...

For that I should have to wait however long it takes them to release QT4 before I can distrubute the programs I WROTE under any license, including GPL, or fork out $1800 for a program that is worth $100, tops?


I think you missed the point... No-one forbids you to release your program in a way you see it fit (as long as it is compatible with any licences of Qt that apply to you)... You just can't release the library with it, as it is not yours... You may release the application as sources as anda_skoa already wrote, but you can't release any part of the library itself (probably including the parts of it that make the linking possible, thus probably any binary distribution is forbidden). Please note that anybody who wants to compile your program for his/her own use, must obide with your licence and the licence of the library (hence, they must own a licence for Qt or use its GPLed version if it is possible).
QtCentre.org - the largest Qt community site and forum where questions get answered