[HN Gopher] Qt Creator 18 Released
___________________________________________________________________
Qt Creator 18 Released
Author : jrepinc
Score : 131 points
Date : 2025-10-30 16:23 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.qt.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.qt.io)
| ktpsns wrote:
| Amazing to see this still maintained. Qt creator was my go-to IDE
| about 20 years ago. At this time, Visual Code, Eclipse, NetBeans
| and friends had been incredibly resource demanding where Qt
| creator felt pretty lightweight yet powerful.
| spacechild1 wrote:
| I'm still using QtCreator as my go-to cross-platform C++ IDE!
| It might give CLion a shot since there's now a free version,
| but so far I haven't really felt a need to do so.
| brooke2k wrote:
| I switched to using JetBrains for most things recently, and
| I'll say this about CLion: it is _incredible_ and my instant
| go-to for CMake-based projects. For any other build system it
| is a massive headache to get working in my experience.
| gmueckl wrote:
| When CLion was launched, it only supported CMake. Support
| for other build tools has been bolted on to that and the
| seams are sadly very obvious IMO.
| wavemode wrote:
| Qt Creator has always been one of the nicer free C++ IDEs, and
| qmake one of the nicer build systems. Even if you're not doing Qt
| development at all.
| jdboyd wrote:
| Qt Creator is reasonably nice. I believe that qmake is
| deprecated now though in favour of CMake.
| wavemode wrote:
| I think rather Qbs (the build system that was supposed to
| replace qmake) was deprecated, in favor of either cmake or
| qmake (both of which are still actively developed and
| supported).
| LorenDB wrote:
| Qt Creator is the only IDE I'll use for C++, and I only wish that
| it had the incredibly in-depth language support for other
| languages (I'm a D fan and would love an actually good IDE for
| it).
| delduca wrote:
| For non Qt projects, but CMake (Conan) based, it is good?
| 72deluxe wrote:
| Yes. I use it with wxWidgets and other C++ projects, never
| touching Qt at all. The performance analysis tools on Linux
| have been useful to me, and the text editor is lovely to use
| instead of fuzzy-font-land like Visual Studio Code.
| ckocagil wrote:
| That's how I always used it. CMake and non-Qt. Very solid IDE.
| neobrain wrote:
| Honestly the name is doing Qt Creator a bit of a disservice,
| given how fantastic an IDE for any C++ codebase it is, Qt or
| not.
|
| Yes - it's good for this use case! It even has built-in support
| for fetching dependencies declared in project conanfiles.
| mkipper wrote:
| I haven't used it in a few years, but I always found it to be
| very flexible and useful for non-Qt projects.
|
| I last used it for an embedded project, which are sometimes a
| pain to set up in an IDE (cross-compiler, sysroot, debug
| server, etc.), and I was shocked by how easy it was to get
| going and how smooth it felt compared to most IDEs.
| albertzeyer wrote:
| QtCreator was a bit like the lightweight version of KDevelop for
| me. I didn't really needed any of the Qt features, just the C++
| editor. And the C++ support was really good.
| nurettin wrote:
| For me it had the best debugger integration and visualizers
| back in mid 2000s. In fact that's how I learned about .gdbinit
| and macros.
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| Anyone else here old enough to have used the similar UIM/X for
| Motif ?!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-10-30 23:01 UTC)