Mixing Qt and Boost

Question

I'm looking at starting a project in C++ using the Qt 4 framework (a cross-platform GUI is required). I've heard great things about the Boost libraries from friends and online. I've started reading up on both and wanted to ask a cursory question before I got too deep: Are these two development "systems" mutually exclusive?

My initial searching and reading shows some overlap in the signal handling, custom build systems, and other low-level primitives.

Does it make sense to use them both in the same project?

Solution 1

Yes it makes perfect sense. I would generally prefer using the boost/stdlib functions where possible rather than their Qt alternatives.

It makes the code easier to port to the next framework.
It makes is easier for new non-Qt programmers to get upto speed.
Boost has some great functionality and is getting more all the time.

note: strings to/from widgets are probably the main exception - inside the GUI I would use Qt strings to save confusing casts everywhere.

Solution 2

This paper compares signal slots mechanism in QT and Boost::Signal very decently. It is a must read for those who are a bit curious of this mix.

Solution 3

Especially since you are going cross-platform, you should have a nicely layered architecture, with the business logic and data access as removed as possible from the GUI. In this case, it would make sense to use Boost when writing the backend of your application, and only jump to Qt for the frontend, with the mandatory pile of casts done in the glue.

If your "engine" is separate from your GUI choice, you will be able to swap out Qt for something else in the future (native libraries perhaps) with minimal effort.

Solution 4

We (Last.fm) use them both together, though we only just started to do so, and so haven't a good deal of experience yet. So far everything is fine though :)

Solution 5

There are potential problems with using Boost.Signals alongside QT. These are documented in the Boost.Signals FAQ.

View more solutions

Comments

[dwj]

Good paper. Thanks for the link.

[sivabudh]

Qt also has great functionality and also is getting more all the time. Qt has great (better) documentation compared to Boost's (based on my experience of using both). One could make an argument that using Boost makes it harder for non-Boost programmers, as well.

[Martin Beckett]

True for boost, but I would still use std::vector etc over Qt's collection classes

[Mohammad Kanan]

More of an opinion than an answer.