Reputation: 7112
There are pretty many questions regarding C++ GUI toolkits for Windows, but they mostly apply to desktop OS versions.
I'm now starting a C++ project for Windows CE 5.0 VGA hand-held device, and thinking about what GUI library to choose. I have some experience using MFC in Windows CE projects, but there are some known weak points of MFC mentioned here at SO (e.g., pretty outdated technologies used, bad abstraction, overuse of C++ preprocessor, etc.). For desktop projects they recommend QT and WTL mostly. At the same time MFC has some characteristics to be still considerable for embedded development.
So, how do you think, is it reasonable to spent some resources learning new GUI toolkit to switch from MFC, and what toolkit would you recommend in this case? Or is MFC still the most considerable for Windows CE embedded development?
The most important characteristics of a toolkit are: moderate CPU and memory load, small runtime size, good object-oriented design, compliance with good modern C++ practices, steep learning curve, development speed, commercial look, handy debug and design tools.
(What is needed in the project: serial port communication, threads, plots and diagrams drawing, ActiveSync communication.)
Upvotes: 7
Views: 2813
Reputation: 103
For diff
Qt
fetaure rich, modern design (better for human, not necessary for machine), portable, open source
MFC or WTL
faster, native feeling, integrate with OS (It is critical if your applicaiton needs to call system APIs, e.g. control another application in a hack way).
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 2566
We have Qt 4.5 on Windows CE 5.0 project at finishing stage, so I try to tell about advantages / disadvantages of Qt developing comparing to MFC.
Qt Pluses:
Qt minuses:
I think, that main advantage of MFC comparing to Qt it its minimal memory and CPU footprint. If this is not issue - choose Qt.
P.S. Com port communication and plot drawing not natively included in Qt, but LGPL Qt-based libraries exist, which give you such features (As example "Qwt" for plotting).
Upvotes: 8
Reputation: 3386
If you know MFC then stick with it: it works fine for CE. There are of course some restrictions compared to Desktop MFC, but they are generally not significant. I think the main issue we have found is that printing isn't supported in MFC8 for CE (VS2005).
On the other hand if you have a blank canvas I'd recommend going for .NET -- either C# or VB, whichever you feel most comfortable with.
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 39871
First advantage is that QT is a cross-platform lib. Secondly, MFC is an headache. The simplest things to do with MFC may turn to a big problem . So move from MFC to the QT as soon as it is possible.
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 52679
If you learn QT, you'll be well placed to write code for all the other (Linux) platforms that are being pushed by the lines of Nokia, Intel and Google. That in itself makes it the most appropriate technology for me!
You may still have to look to other libraries for some of the other aspects of your code, but using QT for the GUI is never going to be a bad choice.
Upvotes: 1