Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Kim Enkovaara <kim.enkovaara@xxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 14:30:41 +0300
Jan Panteltje wrote:
Well, if Nokia indeed bought it, and if they ever start using it,
they will be dead.
As it is bloatware.
There are already S60 and Windows CE ports of Qt available.
Qt is not very heavy library. It is split into many modules and not all
of them need to be loaded or even built. Especially for embedded
platforms the library can be customized. Qt has been used already for
years in mobile phones.
Just looking into the qt directory size does not tell that much. Full
build includes XML parsers, html renderer (based on webkit), database
connectors, scripting engines etc. And also debugging symbols for
c++ libraries are huge when built with some compilers (gcc for example),
but they can be stripped off.
--Kim
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- References:
- Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: xray
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Tim Williams
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Phil Hobbs
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Phil Hobbs
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Nico Coesel
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Frank Buss
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Kim Enkovaara
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Frank Buss
- Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- Prev by Date: Re: Questions on an SFH3710 phototransistor
- Next by Date: Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- Previous by thread: Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- Next by thread: Re: Larkin, Power BASIC cannot be THAT good:
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|