Announce : QtAda version 2.4

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Dmitry A. Kazakov

unread,
Dec 6, 2009, 5:15:35 AM12/6/09
to
Leonid Dulman asked me to announce this:

QtAda is Ada-95(05)� interface to Qt4 graphics library
Qt version 4.6.0 open source and qt4c.dll(libqt4c.so)� biulded with
Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 (2010 beta) in Windows
MINGW GCC Windows compiler and gcc� in Linux
Package tested with gnat gpl 2009 ada compiler in Windows 32bit and 64bit
and Linux x86-64� Kubuntu 9.10
Qtada� it's� 9245 procedures and functions , distributed in 256 packages.
It supports GUI, SQL, Multimedia, Web, Net and many others thinks.
QtAda for Windows and Linux (Unix) is available from

http://users1.jabry.com/adastudio/index.html

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

Dirk Heinrichs

unread,
Dec 6, 2009, 1:59:47 PM12/6/09
to
Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

> Leonid Dulman asked me to announce this:
>
> QtAda is Ada-95(05) interface to Qt4 graphics library

Although I appreciate this very much, I think it's not a good idea to have
two different efforts to provide the same interface. Wouldn't it be better
to join forces?

It could be completed in less time and would have a larger user base which
also finds possible bugs much faster so that in the end the outcome would be
an even better interface.

Maybe joining both projects would even result in a larger developer group
who work on it (and maybe also on a KDE4 interface).

Bye...

Dirk

Georg Bauhaus

unread,
Dec 7, 2009, 5:52:44 AM12/7/09
to
Dirk Heinrichs schrieb:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
>> Leonid Dulman asked me to announce this:
>>
>> QtAda is Ada-95(05) interface to Qt4 graphics library
>
> Although I appreciate this very much, I think it's not a good idea to have
> two different efforts to provide the same interface. Wouldn't it be better
> to join forces?

OTOH, competition, if possible, may provide for different
approaches to writing Qt programs in Ada. One or the other
approach might more portable, or be better in some situation.
If I'm not mistaken, Qt4Ada (by Leonid Dulman) can be used with
Ada 95 compilers; it does not depend on so many Ada 2005
anonymous access types as QtAda does. (Can the latter be compiled
at all with compilers other than a recent GNAT?)


http://users1.jabry.com/adastudio/index.html
http://www.qtada.com/
http://qt4ada.sourceforge.net/ (by Yves Bailly, I don't know
whether this is an active project)

Licenses might differ, too, I think.

Dirk Heinrichs

unread,
Dec 7, 2009, 1:01:35 PM12/7/09
to
Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> Dirk Heinrichs schrieb:
>> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>
>>> Leonid Dulman asked me to announce this:
>>>
>>> QtAda is Ada-95(05) interface to Qt4 graphics library
>>
>> Although I appreciate this very much, I think it's not a good idea to
>> have two different efforts to provide the same interface. Wouldn't it be
>> better to join forces?
>
> OTOH, competition, if possible, may provide for different
> approaches to writing Qt programs in Ada.

Usually I would agree to this argument. However, we are talking about
projects to provide an Ada interface for a GUI toolkit written in another
language, not about a project to actually _develop_ a GUI toolkit.

> One or the other
> approach might more portable, or be better in some situation.
> If I'm not mistaken, Qt4Ada (by Leonid Dulman) can be used with
> Ada 95 compilers; it does not depend on so many Ada 2005
> anonymous access types as QtAda does.

Any reason why all of this can't be achieved by a single project?

> (Can the latter be compiled
> at all with compilers other than a recent GNAT?)

That's IMHO another reason to have only one project. At least two persons
have used much of their time to achive more or less the same goal, which is
really great, but in the end both projects lack important functionality
which is present in the other.

Bye...

Dirk

Florian Weimer

unread,
Dec 12, 2009, 9:43:23 AM12/12/09
to
* Dirk Heinrichs:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
>> Leonid Dulman asked me to announce this:
>>
>> QtAda is Ada-95(05) interface to Qt4 graphics library
>
> Although I appreciate this very much, I think it's not a good idea to have
> two different efforts to provide the same interface. Wouldn't it be better
> to join forces?

I believe there's a license discrepancy, but QtAda's licensing appears
to be rather unclear.

Dirk Heinrichs

unread,
Dec 14, 2009, 1:13:06 PM12/14/09
to
Florian Weimer wrote:

> I believe there's a license discrepancy, but QtAda's licensing appears
> to be rather unclear.

Isn't it so that both are more ore less one man projects. They can change
license at will, or even combine both. So that problem could be solved
rather quickly (if both projects are willing to so, though).

Bye...

Dirk

Vadim Godunko

unread,
Dec 17, 2009, 3:43:46 AM12/17/09
to
On Dec 12, 5:43 pm, Florian Weimer <f...@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
>
> I believe there's a license discrepancy, but QtAda's licensing appears
> to be rather unclear.
QtAda's licensing is pretty clear: QtAda GPL Edition available under
GPL license, QtAda Professional edition covered by GNAT Modified GPL.

Someone can ask why we don't use LGPL as Nokia do? The answer is very
simple - Nokia license Qt Open Source Edition under GPL/LGPL with
minor exception, to protect youself from free use Qt in commercial
closed source projects (You must provide all your source code on
Nokia's request).

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages