From: Gregory Seidman <gsslist+ruby@...>
Date: 2007-02-24T06:22:32+09:00
Subject: Re: Textmate on Windoze!

On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 05:47:33AM +0900, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 05:09:04AM +0900, David Vallner wrote:
> > Chad Perrin wrote:
> > > Actually, using Qt 4 might be a good way to keep me from trying it out,
> > > especially since Qt generally means "plus thirty KDE libraries".
> > 
> > . o 0 (Huh?)
> > 
> > KDE depends on Qt. This is ostensibly not the case the other way around,
> > Qt being a separate product predating KDE by five years. It is
> > alltogether feasible to make Qt-based non-KDE applications. (As I do so
> > using PyQt4 whenever I need a quick GUI hack.)
> 
> The "ostensibly" bit is the important part of your statement: yes, it's
> entirely possible to write Qt applications without KDE libraries, but so
> rare as to be thoroughly remarkable -- especially since I haven't seen a
> credible app yet that uses Qt but not KDE libraries.  The potential for
> an exception is the reason I said that Qt "generall means", not "always
> means".

I've written several Qt apps and never used a KDE library. Many commercial
products (e.g. Opera) are written with Qt alone and no KDE. I don't
think there would be any significant value in the KDE libraries for
implementing Textmate on Qt (unless they wanted to make it embeddable as a
KPart, which would be cool but probably not worth the trouble or KDE
dependency).

> > (Were I feeling risky, I'd tell you to get your facts right before
> > trolling.)
> 
> Good thing you weren't feeling that way, then.

I'm tempted, but I'll resist. While the majority of open source apps that
use Qt do so through KDE, the same is not true for commercial apps. Your
statement that "Qt generally means 'plus thirty KDE libraries'" is, at
best, only applicable to open source Qt apps, which makes it irrelevant to
the discussion of Textmate. At worst it is actual trolling.

--Greg