If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
First sentence wrong, second one is right
New QWidget class couldn't be added because you can't have two QWidget classes in same namespace. Extending one class isn't big change as Widgets consist of many classes.
I think he meant a new widget, it means the development of the widgets module is not dead.
- it's a cross platform image editor with the interface done entirely with Qt/Qml. It's definitely not a trivial interface either, doing something like that using Gtk, or even tradition QWidgets would be virtually impossible.
Oh, and QtCreator is awesome. Only thing that comes close is VS + Visual Assist.
On topic: what I was actually waiting for him to criticize was how GNOME folks tend to integrate things in GTK that are relevant to GNOME, but completely useless anywhere else (eg. the slider switch).
Actually, at the very end of the talk, he says in his view it seems like most of the GTK devs seem to see themselves as GNOME developers, and everything they do is for GNOME, and any 3rd party apps are viewed as on their own. While Qt seems much more focused on the 3rd party apps due to it's history at Trolltech and the fact that KDE is built off of Qt is the side project, while those 3rd party apps are what they really focus on.
The other thing i noticed he seemed to emphasize a lot was the mac/windows support. That seemed like it was one of the primary reasons for the switch. Only 15% of their users are on linux, so giving a 1st class impression on other platforms was important for his project, and while he got the GTK version working elsewhere, he was constantly running into weird bugs. While Qt views those other platforms as 1st class citizens and he's had better luck there.
Too bad that Gtk/Gnome devs are such morons, as GTK apps look now much prettier than Qt or KDE apps in my humble opinion.
In an GTK based DE yes GTK does look better then Qt, but in an non GTK based DE and cross plattform Qt looks a lot better than GTK.
But i still think Qt looks better in an GTK based environment than GTK does in an Qt based or other plattforms.
I find most things presented in the video to be valid.
"GTK+ is primarily intended to be used on the GNOME desktop, using X11 as the backend"
"GTK+ is targeting laptops as the device form factor"
"GTK+ must focus on being the toolkit of the GNOME platform first"
"...people ask whether GTK+ is focused on creating "small apps" or "large applications," and his answer is "small apps." In other words, GTK+ widgets are designed to make it easy and fast to write small apps for GNOME: apps like Clocks, rather than GIMP or Inkscape."
"Otte said. His answer historically was that GTK3 is awesome and everyone should port, but he said he has begun to doubt that"
And with that summing up, it's clear that a big, cross-platform app (I was surprised how big it was) like Subsurface shouldn't use GTK.