Qt VS doublecmd

Qt mono repo : .. you could check out all submodules and simply use CMake to exactly achieve this. A mono repo also means that if I only use qtbase and declarative, I would need to have all submodules in there? - No

For e.g. if you’re writing a framework, you need to interface with Cocoa on MacOS to draw windows, which only provides an Objective C or Swift interface. You can look at the Qt source code and see how they do it: https://github.com/qt/qtbase/tree/067b53864112c084587fa9a507eb4bde3d50a6e1/src/plugins/platforms/cocoa

That's because Qt 6 wholeheartedly converted to CMake for you. (At least it is better than qmake.) In order to support this Qt has this large battery of CMake files [1]. Qt is of course a clear outlier, but you can't expect the same level of support from every other library you want. My points about "anything exotic" still stand.

[1] https://github.com/qt/qtbase/tree/dev/cmake

I don't see any connect in https://github.com/qt/qtbase/blob/dev/src/corelib/tools/qsharedpointer_impl.h, and QPointer isn't a QObject (though I don't know if the latter is actually necessary for signal-slots). One (unreliable) way to test is to see if a QPointer fails to be nulled out when the QObject is blocked by a QSignalBlocker. Alternatively I'd set a data breakpoint on a QPointer and try it out. But I don't have the time right now.

Interestingly Qt has QPointer which nulls itself out when the target T is deleted. It's convenient when I want weak references to GUI objects (though you have to be careful to check for its presence after every time you call code which could possibly delete it, I usually call it QPointer maybe_foo). However, from my brief look at the source (link), it's implemented in terms of qsharedpointer.h-> qsharedpointer_impl.h and QtSharedPointer (not sure how it works, but there's probably overhead going on). I wonder how it works, and compares to generational indexes or Vale's generational references (link).

The tag is right there: https://github.com/qt/qtbase/tree/v5.15.4-lts-lgpl

Today I'm looking in to how the MSVC Development builds work. Yesterday I downloaded a version labeled 20220527 and from what I can tell, after looking at the source (another 3gb of disk space gone for now) https://github.com/qt/qtbase/commit/5d8f815e101da3ae9cd6a666cc097853f52b21da is the current commit.

Well yeah, I mean no one forces you to use Explorer for file management under Windows. I'm an old-time Norton Commander user, and when Windows came around I switched to Total Commander. There are open-source alternatives too, even cross-platform ones, like this one: https://doublecmd.sourceforge.io/.

That being said, no one forces you to use Windows either - except maybe your employer or the software you are using, but this is getting less and less of a problem fortunately (web apps, ).

Double Commander. Search Replace Multiple files.

I've been looking for a Linux alternative ever since I mostly switched away from Windows a few years ago, and so far this one is the best FOSS alternative I found: https://doublecmd.sourceforge.io/ - it's even written in Pascal, same as TC.

Very useful, I bought it years ago and used it on Windows. I've been using only Linux for about 10 years now, but I'd like to use Total Commander on Linux.

Double Commander is open source, cross-platform and written with Lazarus / FPC : https://doublecmd.sourceforge.io/

But ... I am not able not to use Midnight Commander ...

Try free clone of TC, Double Commander: https://doublecmd.sourceforge.io/

For me, a file manager simply has to work and offer a certain range of functions. That's why I use Double Commander myself. Is this tool modern in the sense that it is visually appealing? Or in the sense that it is created with a programming language that is currently popular? Definitely not.

Indeed, it's built with Free Pascal and Lazarus.

https://github.com/doublecmd/doublecmd/wiki/Development

I prefer DoubleCommander: https://doublecmd.sourceforge.io/

It is a free, cross-platform alternative, also written in Pascal and (IMHO) has surpassed TotalCommander in many ways.