Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

wxWidgets 3.0 RC Supports GTK+ 3, Other Features

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • wxWidgets 3.0 RC Supports GTK+ 3, Other Features

    Phoronix: wxWidgets 3.0 RC Supports GTK+ 3, Other Features

    After being in development for several years, the first release candidate of the wxWidgets 3.0 tool-kit is now available. This update to the wxWidgets cross-platform GUI tool-kit has received extensive changes to make this a very exciting and worthwhile upgrade...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ3OTQ

  • #2
    wxWidgets is a layer of abstraction sitting on top of other layers: gtk, win32, etc, plus we got Qt, Java, whatever, and while wxWidgets was really useful in the past, nowadays this project is yet another worthless piece of junk that is only interesting to those who already invested time into learning the previous version, for others Qt 4/5+ is a lot better option.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by mark45 View Post
      wxWidgets is a layer of abstraction sitting on top of other layers: gtk, win32, etc, plus we got Qt, Java, whatever, and while wxWidgets was really useful in the past, nowadays this project is yet another worthless piece of junk that is only interesting to those who already invested time into learning the previous version, for others Qt 4/5+ is a lot better option.
      Qt uses a platform's native controls where available, and whilst not many people are likely to pick it up for a new project, it's still used in many places - not least, Google Drive and Dropbox.

      I'm happy to see that they're moving towards a 3.0 release - it's been their intended goal for about 7 years now!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by archibald View Post
        Qt uses a platform's native controls where available
        Actually Qt uses own Qt controls (widgets) and draws it by itself with QStyle class. They looks like native widgets but really it doesn't.
        wxWidgets really wraps native system-provided widgets and developers can use and extend them as described in native API documentation.

        Originally posted by archibald View Post
        Google Drive and Dropbox
        They use wxWebView - this class wraps IE Trident engine under Windows and there is no need to distribute it additionally. QWebView ships with huge WebKit engine under Windows.

        Originally posted by archibald View Post
        I'm happy to see that they're moving towards a 3.0 release - it's been their intended goal for about 7 years now!
        BTW both Google Drive and Drop is already use development 2.9 branch that will be published as 3.0 stable branch.

        Qt and wxWidgets have different architectures and they have own advantages in different use cases.

        Comment


        • #5
          For the records: I used wxWidgets and Qt (with a lot more time having been spent on wxWidgets).

          Originally posted by kosenko View Post
          Actually Qt uses own Qt controls (widgets) and draws it by itself with QStyle class. They looks like native widgets but really it doesn't.
          wxWidgets really wraps native system-provided widgets and developers can use and extend them as described in native API documentation.
          It used to use its own widgets, but recently it's started using the native ones: "Qt uses the native graphics API of each platform it supports, taking full advantage of system resources." from http://qt.digia.com/Product/Qt-Core-...tions/Library/

          Originally posted by kosenko View Post
          They use wxWebView - this class wraps IE Trident engine under Windows and there is no need to distribute it additionally. QWebView ships with huge WebKit engine under Windows.
          I didn't know they were just using wxWebView, I assumed they used more. Where did you find that out?


          Originally posted by kosenko View Post
          BTW both Google Drive and Drop is already use development 2.9 branch that will be published as 3.0 stable branch.

          Qt and wxWidgets have different architectures and they have own advantages in different use cases.
          Even as a wxWidgets user, I struggle to think of why somebody would choose it over Qt for a new project. I know that Qt has a few quirks like it's meta-object compiler, but I can't imagine those being deemed so strange as to preclude it's use.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by archibald View Post
            It used to use its own widgets, but recently it's started using the native ones: "Qt uses the native graphics API of each platform it supports, taking full advantage of system resources." from http://qt.digia.com/Product/Qt-Core-...tions/Library/
            You have confused the meaning of that. They use the native API as a means to render their stuff. See this article: Qt Graphics and Performance – An Overview

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by archibald View Post
              It used to use its own widgets, but recently it's started using the native ones: "Qt uses the native graphics API of each platform it supports, taking full advantage of system resources." from http://qt.digia.com/Product/Qt-Core-...tions/Library/
              "native controls" means Qt C++ web controls inside WebKit.
              "Qt uses the native graphics API" means that Qt renders with native graphics API. Qt don't wraps native widgets.
              Originally posted by archibald View Post
              I didn't know they were just using wxWebView, I assumed they used more. Where did you find that out?
              wxWebView is just one of widgets that they have used. I known wxWidgets architecture and I investigated those applications. Microsoft provides tools (Spy++) with that you can investigate native Windows widgets. BTW with these tools you can see that Qt widgets definitely isn't native under Windows.

              Originally posted by archibald View Post
              Even as a wxWidgets user, I struggle to think of why somebody would choose it over Qt for a new project.
              wxWidgets is better when you need native widgets, better integration with native system APIs. Also wxWidgets has more rich widgets set (wxAUI, wxPropertyGrid, wxRibbonBar etc).
              Originally posted by archibald View Post
              I know that Qt has a few quirks like it's meta-object compiler, but I can't imagine those being deemed so strange as to preclude it's use.
              It is a huge disadvantage for me. I prefer pure C++ without Microsoft and Qt language "improvements". And I don't know why sometimes I need to filter Qt events and other time I should handle Qt signals.

              Unfortunately there is a lot of misinformation and FUD from Qt and KDE developers that they spread over Internet against wxWidgets.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by archibald View Post
                It used to use its own widgets, but recently it's started using the native ones: "Qt uses the native graphics API of each platform it supports, taking full advantage of system resources." from http://qt.digia.com/Product/Qt-Core-...tions/Library/
                "native controls" means Qt C++ web controls inside WebKit.
                "Qt uses the native graphics API" means that Qt renders with native graphics API. Qt don't wraps native widgets.
                Originally posted by archibald View Post
                I didn't know they were just using wxWebView, I assumed they used more. Where did you find that out?
                wxWebView is just one of widgets that they have used. I known wxWidgets architecture and I investigated that applications. Microsoft provides tools (Spy++) with that you can investigate native Windows widgets. BTW with these tools you can see that Qt widgets definitely isn't native under Windows.

                Originally posted by archibald View Post
                Even as a wxWidgets user, I struggle to think of why somebody would choose it over Qt for a new project.
                wxWidgets is better when you need native widgets, better integration with native system APIs. Also wxWidgets has more rich widgets set (wxAUI, wxPropertyGrid, wxRibbonBar etc).
                Originally posted by archibald View Post
                I know that Qt has a few quirks like it's meta-object compiler, but I can't imagine those being deemed so strange as to preclude it's use.
                It is a huge disadvantage for me. I prefer pure C++ without Microsoft and Qt language "improvements". And I don't know why sometimes I need to filter Qt events and other time I should handle Qt signals.

                Unfortunately there is a lot of misinformation and FUD from Qt and KDE developers that they spread over Internet against wxWidgets.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by archibald View Post
                  It used to use its own widgets, but recently it's started using the native ones: "Qt uses the native graphics API of each platform it supports, taking full advantage of system resources." from http://qt.digia.com/Product/Qt-Core-...tions/Library/
                  "native controls" means Qt C++ web controls inside WebKit.
                  "Qt uses the native graphics API" means that Qt renders with native graphics API. Qt don't wraps native widgets.
                  Originally posted by archibald View Post
                  I didn't know they were just using wxWebView, I assumed they used more. Where did you find that out?
                  wxWebView is just one of widgets that they have used. I known wxWidgets architecture and I investigated that applications. Microsoft provides tools (Spy++) with that you can investigate native Windows widgets. BTW with these tools you can see that Qt widgets definitely isn't native under Windows.

                  Originally posted by archibald View Post
                  Even as a wxWidgets user, I struggle to think of why somebody would choose it over Qt for a new project.
                  wxWidgets is better when you need native widgets, better integration with native system APIs. Also wxWidgets has more rich widgets set (wxAUI, wxPropertyGrid, wxRibbonBar etc).
                  Originally posted by archibald View Post
                  I know that Qt has a few quirks like it's meta-object compiler, but I can't imagine those being deemed so strange as to preclude it's use.
                  It is a huge disadvantage for me. I prefer pure C++ without Microsoft and Qt language "improvements". And I don't know why sometimes I need to filter Qt events and other time I should handle Qt signals.

                  Unfortunately there is a lot of misinformation and FUD from Qt and KDE developers that they spread over Internet against wxWidgets.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X