Even Microsoft, for all its C++ use, has never produced anything better than MFC to this day, and only Windows team cares about XAML C++, others rather use React Native or Webview2 alongside C++.
It is up to third parties to use frameworks like Qt.
Basically no other platform comes even close in terms of ease of use and performance. The best would be to extend that kind of framework on Windows (and/or Linux) and make it work same / similar.
IMO, metadata (such as date ranges) could instead be stored as empty links leading each task (or maybe showing a symbol such as '@'), paving the way for a 'linked' data format while resulting in a same-width list for easy lookups and editing:
- [x] [@](/2025/12/30..31.md (15:30:21)) task 1
- [ ] [@](/2025/12/29..30.md (16:20:31)) task 2
- [ ] [@](/2025/12/28..28.md (14:20:31)) same day task
- [ ] undated nested task
For instance, the above tasks would link to the virtual '30..31.md' and '29..30.md' files to collect all backlinked tasks for the provided daterange (akin to Obisidan/Logseq/etc).In an ideal world, the task marker could hold the metadata itself, but this would unfortunately result in non-standard behaviour:
- [x](/2025/12/30..12/31 (15:30:21)) task 1
- [ ](/2025/12/29..12/30 (16:20:31)) task 2
- [ ] undated nested task
It would then be up to the editor to render this metadata accordingly.Here's a quick history lesson (as I understand it):
- QtWidgets the original C++ QT graphics library.
- Around 2008 or something, they introduced QML and QtQuick. This was basically declarative UI + javascript for logic.
- QtWidgets is considered 'done' and all new features and dev is basically happening in QML / QtQuick.
- ...as described in this post, the current recommended 'best practice' is to avoid writing a pile of javascript spaghetti and bridge between C++ for logic and QML for UI.
So, long story short: We've moved from a robust C++ framework, to a javascript backed framework to 'appeal to the masses', but it's kind of hard to build a whole application that way, and so 'best practice' is to go back and write your logic in C++.
Does that seem weird to anyone else?
> While powerful, Qt Widgets lack some essential modern features, in my opinion, such as declarative UI, bindings, behaviors, anchors, and more. These features enable the creation of beautiful, animated UIs simply and quickly, as seen in QML.
Hum. QML is certainly declarative.
I'd love to see a breakdown of specifically what features you can't do with widgets, and why having a js <-> c++ bridge is better than not having one.
Don't get me wrong; if you want to write a 100% javascript QML application, that's cool. Go for it... but when you're writing a C++ application and choosing, deliberately, to implement you UI in another language and communicate with that UI via a bridge...
...well, let's just say, if you had another option (eg. just use C++), wouldn't that make sense?
Couldn't you do the the same thing with react native components and logic in C++? (You could) Why is this any better than just writing a react native UI? Or a flutter UI?
You could do any kind of UI, even fully native, if you're implementing the application is c++ and then just doing cross language <-> to the ui.
Right?
[1] - https://doc.qt.io/qt-6/qtqml-cppintegration-overview.html
The tooling, that is why.
Having QtCreator, Qt Design Studio, compiling QML to native code, debugging experience.
React Native has all the gotchas from JavaScript and poor tooling for developers that never left the CLI world.
Flutter depends on Dart, a programming language that was rescued from oblivion thanks to Flutter, and is pretty much useless everywhere else.
5d41402abc4b•2h ago
coffeeaddict1•1h ago