I assume that the Ruby extension for Qt will support version 3 someday. I
just don’t want to put in the effort to learn Qt if at some point I’m going
to have to pay $1550 to upgrade. Of course I could develop under Linux to
avoid this problem, but I want the things I develop to be usable by people
running under Windows too.
I get the impression that Qt is a somewhat better GUI toolkit that others.
I also get the impression that FOX is the next best choice. I’m leaning
toward spending my time learning FOX unless someone wants to explain to me
why I should use Qt instead or why I should consider some other GUI toolkit
that has Ruby support.
From: Pierre Brengard [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 4:19 AM
Subject: Re: Help on installing ruby-qt on windowsXP
I’m curious why you’ve decided to try the
non-commercial version for Windows.
I was looking into that last week and
decided to try FOX instead because
- the non-commerical version is Qt version 2.3, not
version 3 (unless you just download a 30-day evaluation
- getting the Windows commercial version in order to get
version 3 support is prohibitively expensive! - $1550
but, the Ruby extension for Qt 3 does not exist yet !
So, no regret.
WARNING: All e-mail sent to and from this address will be received or
otherwise recorded by the A.G. Edwards corporate e-mail system and is
subject to archival, monitoring or review by, and/or disclosure to,
someone other than the recipient.