[rubymamis]

As someone with 10,000+ lines of C++ code and 10,000+ lines of QML code in his app[1] I can say this is false. It's actually much easier and straightforward to decouple the UI (QML) and logic (C++). It also makes such a great combo - QML is amazing to write UIs in and C++ is a fast, battle tested compiled language. I wrote a little bit about my app development if you're curious[2].

[1] https://get-notes.com

[2] https://rubymamistvalove.com/block-editor

[righthand]

By the same metric c++ qwidgets is amazing to write UIs and by keeping everything in c++ there is easily less abstraction, I can easily navigate my code, not jump between two different systems. There really is no great reason why qml objects couldn’t be c++ classes/functions. Decoupling does what for me, but introduce more syntax, documentation, and learning curves. You should give writing a Kde6 Kirigami app a try and experience the absolute pleasure of adding another abstraction layer onto qml, c++ to muck things up. Qml is the cooler brother of Uic, but at least uic was optional.

[rubymamis]

I'm very fond of QML's syntax, so can't quite understand why you don't like it. It has a learning curve, but I studied all the basics in a day (it's just so simple and intuitive, imo).

Not sure how "QML in C++" would look like, but it doesn't sound pretty. Recently someone published a declarative UI inside C++[1] (without a different syntax) but I felt a bit off with this approach. Maybe that's something you mean?

[1] https://github.com/brisklib/brisk

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42450963

[righthand]

I don’t know how else to explain it that compared to qwidgets where everything can be handled in code. Qml might be all the things it claims , elegance, separation of concerns, simple syntax, etc, but that still doesn’t eclipse my initial issue that it’s an unnecessary abstraction. You might not think it’s pretty but I think it’s pretty to only use c++.