comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Ada needs Qt(5) bindings
@ 2013-07-09 18:17 Gour
  2013-07-09 20:00 ` Simon Wright
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Gour @ 2013-07-09 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)


Hello!

I was evaluating Ada as implementation language for my open-source
project, but not having enoough time to go straight to the coding and
waiting for newer GNAT to arrive in Debian Sid, I spent few more months
looking for some possible alternatives and have arrived to the
conclusion that: Ada (seriously) needs Qt(5) bindings.

There is QtAda project (http://qtada.com/) which will hopefully release
bindings for Qt5. Moreover, there is Ada Studio 2013 - work done by
Leonid Dulman and, iirc, there used to be another Qt-Ada related
project.

However, it would be nice if the Ada community would get single Qt(5)
bindings, possibly with the support from Ada Core.

Haskell language which we evaluated in the past has "Haskell Qt Binding
Generator " GSOC project
(https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/project/google/gsoc2013/ofan/44001).

My evaluation of OCaml also failed due to (labl)GTK-only bindings and
the GTK project is in a bad shape even on Linux pissing many
devs/projects with GTK3 which is actually becoming GNOME3.

Canonical is moving to Qt
(http://askubuntu.com/questions/281092/why-is-canonical-choosing-qt-over-gtk-for-unitys-next-generation),
serious projects like OpenShot video editor which recently finished
their kickstart campaign - pledged for $20,000 goal and got $45,028,
LXDE DE is moving away from GTK to Qt. Actually, I'm not aware and/or
heard about *any* project moving to GTK from Qt.

Another point is that during the panel discussion The Future of Qt
Recorded at the Qt Developer Days in Berlin in 2012, there was even
question that Qt becomes part of C++ standardisation process in the
future.
(http://qt-project.org/videos/watch/panel-discussion-the-future-of-qt)

Otoh, there is desire from many devs to move away from C++ to some more
safe language.

Unfortunately, there are several such languages, starting from D, then
Go, Rust (which attracty many devs), as well as some obscure ones like
Nimrod providing elegant syntax and compelling features, but all those
are tied to provide just C FFI and have no bindings for C++ GUI libs.

GTK team on Linux does not have many devs, while support for Windows
and Mac OS X is practically non-existant making Qt the only viable
choice for multi-platform GUI development which with the Qt5.1 release
extending the choice of platforms to mobile ones like iOS & Android.

My quest has also brought me to .NET/Mono where I tried languages like
Cobra (http://cobra-language.com/) - interesting language with clean
Pythonic syntax adding e.g. contracts to CLI.

Of course, I've also looked at F# which is very nice & powerful
language.

.NET/Mono has Qyoto - Qt bindings for .NET/Mono platform, but no Qt5
support for the foreseeable future -
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.bindings/7853.

In Python world there are attempts to bring some static typing with the
projects like Nuitka (http://www.nuitka.net/pages/overview.html) and
mypy (http://www.mypy-lang.org/index.html), but it's certainly
questionable how much is Python in general suitable for medium-larger
projects where Ada simply shines. However, there are plenty of GUI
choices available for Python, Qt5 included.

Finally, I believe there is (some) truth in the words of Leonid Dulman
trying to explain the phenomena why is Ada not used more widely when
saying: "It seems to me, that the basic reason is an insufficient
environment and rather small numbers of IDE and packages, that expands
language possibilities."
(http://users1.jabry.com/adastudio/modernAdaProgramming.pdf)


One month ago I read interesting post entitled "Language Design Deal
Breakers"
(http://sebastiansylvan.com/2013/05/25/language-design-deal-breakers/)
with quite some comments @Reddit
(http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1f1uz3/sebastian_sylvans_language_design_deal_breakers/)
and the top one says: "It seems like Ada actually fits every single of
his criteria. I will not hold my breath while I'm waiting for him to
switch however.", so it's pity that such a fine language does not
attract more devs.

So, for my use case I'd like that Ada community put more support behind
Qt5 bindings 'cause performance of Ada is surely way better and more
pleasureable to use than .NET/Mono. 

As last resort, I'm curious what do you think about the possibility to
use PyQt for GUI part and calling Ada stuff from Python by using
Ada-Python Interfacing
(http://www.adacore.com/gnatpro/mixed-language/adapython/) ? 

I hope you'll understan my post in a positive manner trying to improve
usage of Ada in general...


Sincerely,
Gour

-- 
He is a perfect yogī who, by comparison to his own self, 
sees the true equality of all beings, in both their 
happiness and their distress, O Arjuna!

http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2013-07-10 19:10 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-07-09 18:17 Ada needs Qt(5) bindings Gour
2013-07-09 20:00 ` Simon Wright
2013-07-10  5:49   ` Gour
2013-07-10 12:50     ` Simon Wright
2013-07-09 23:31 ` Nasser M. Abbasi
2013-07-10  6:02   ` Gour
2013-07-10  6:46     ` Nasser M. Abbasi
2013-07-10 10:06       ` Gour
2013-07-10 15:30 ` Dirk Heinrichs
2013-07-10 19:10   ` Gour

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox