Lothar Scholz wrote:

> Hello Richard,
> 
> RD> I wouldn't call Qt Designer a 'half ready workaround'. I certainly
> prefer RD> the UI of the Qt4 version to the Qt3 one, but it is a perfectly
> useful RD> tool.
> 
> RD> KDevelop 3.2.x and the forthcoming Eric3 3.8 have support for using Qt
> RD> Designer with QtRuby/Korundum. You can either compile the .ui file to
> ruby RD> code with the rbuic tool, or read the .ui file in at runtime
> using the RD> 'qui' extension with Qt::WidgetFactory. KDevelop has
> complete integration, RD> with Qt Designer as a KPart component, while
> Eric3 starts the Qt Designer RD> app when you click on a .ui file in the
> project.
> 
> It is still far from what people expect. There is IMHO no direct GUI <->
> Code interaction as for example Delphi or other tools offer (if i'm
> wrong here please correct me). Having QtDesigner embedded in the
> IDE window is not something that i would call "integrated". This word
> should describe the workflow and there you can find the problem.
You can run the UI in 'test mode' as you develop it with Qt Designer. I
haven't used Delphi so I don't know about the comparison.

> But i have a very special opinion here, for me even Apples IB is not
> integrated into XCode - in contrast to RealBasic.
My personal yardstick for RAD UI designers is Apple's IB, not the Visual
Basic interface even if is it more interactive. You can have RAD for less
expert people with Visual Basic, as well as RAD for the higher end
programmer who can use QtRuby/Korundum or Interface Builder. They will cope
with steep learning curves or whatever if it improves their productivity. 

The Qt4 version of Qt Designer looks more like Apple's IB at least..

-- Richard