Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Biggest Problem With GTK & What Qt Does Good

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

  • The Biggest Problem With GTK & What Qt Does Good

    Phoronix: The Biggest Problem With GTK & What Qt Does Good

    Dirk Hohndel of Intel's Open-Source Technology Center has talked at length on his experiences in the GTK and Qt tool-kits, including what he views as the biggest problem with GTK...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU2ODM

  • #2
    Holy sheep, where's muh popcorn? Quick!

    Comment


    • #3
      "the biggest problem with GTK is the attitude of the core community."
      Naaoooooooooooooooooooooooo......... I would have never guessed that.

      Comment


      • #4
        Can't lie, QtCreator is my absolute favorite IDE, and if I'm doing anything even remotely C/C++ I'll use it (Qt or not doesn't even matter).

        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).
        Nevertheless, GLib/GTK has one of the best structured APIs among C libraries.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mark45 View Post
          Holy sheep, where's muh popcorn? Quick!
          *munch munch*

          Comment


          • #6
            a better IDE than Eclipse CDT?

            Originally posted by Ancurio View Post
            Can't lie, QtCreator is my absolute favorite IDE, and if I'm doing anything even remotely C/C++ I'll use it (Qt or not doesn't even matter).

            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).
            Nevertheless, GLib/GTK has one of the best structured APIs among C libraries.
            Except for Qt designer, I can't see how QtCreator can beat Eclipse CDT. I have not used QtCreator for three years, ans thus may fail to see its advancement.

            Comment


            • #7
              Still bloatware

              Doesn't change the fact Qt is a bloated pos.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by PengZheng View Post
                Except for Qt designer, I can't see how QtCreator can beat Eclipse CDT. I have not used QtCreator for three years, ans thus may fail to see its advancement.
                I haven't used Eclipse, but from what I saw on my coworkers screens looked a bit painful to work with.. might just be an uninformed impression though.
                Anything Eclipse does that Creator doesn't that I should look into?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ancurio View Post
                  I haven't used Eclipse, but from what I saw on my coworkers screens looked a bit painful to work with.. might just be an uninformed impression though.
                  Anything Eclipse does that Creator doesn't that I should look into?
                  The first thing comes to my mind is that Eclipse has a powerful plugin system. But I can't decide whether it's more powerful than QtCreator's. For most tools I used within CDT, now it seems that they have also been integrated into QtCreator, i.e. svn, git, valgrind .. I just googled it.

                  Given that, I can only mention two features I like most for Eclipse:
                  The first one is its local history, which may be viewed as a mini-version control system. Whenever you save a file, it generates a history entry for that file automatically, quite handy.
                  The second one is then eclim plugin. You can use vim with eclipse, you can even control eclipse within your vim without even openning eclipse gui.

                  But the main drawback of Eclipse is that it is memory hungry. I upgrade my old thinkpad t60's memory to 2.5G to avoid memory swaping when opening large projects. I didn't mean to begin an IDE war, and am willing to hear QtCreator users to share their experience.
                  Last edited by PengZheng; 01-12-2014, 04:51 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by PengZheng View Post
                    Except for Qt designer, I can't see how QtCreator can beat Eclipse CDT. I have not used QtCreator for three years, ans thus may fail to see its advancement.
                    CDT's parser sucks. Well "suck" may be a bit exaggerated, but it's nothing compared to QtCreator (which uses LLVM/clang afaik). I tried a shitload of IDEs for work on a ~1 million line C++ project and CDT just failed parsing it whole. Therefore code completion was worthless - which makes the IDE useless. If I don't have code completion/hints/etc. I might as well use vim, emacs or sublime text (although ST does have a SublimeClang plugin, so .....).

                    Anyway: QtCreator worked just fine with that source. It's even pretty forgiving. If it can't parse a certain include, you don't have code completion for that particular thing, but everything else is still handled fine.

                    Now I'm waiting for JetBrains to get their C++ IDE out the door. I love IDEA for my Java, Python and Scala projects and if the C++ part will be even half as good, I'm sold :-)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re

                      Originally posted by frign View Post
                      Doesn't change the fact Qt is a bloated pos.
                      Seems that you don't have any experience with Qt... Especially when a Qt 5 core application is just a few KB now...
                      ----------

                      There is a lot to be liked about Qt.
                      I also use Qt Creator for non-Qt C/C++ application development. To whom I show it's capabilities and easiness, all get impressed.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by frign View Post
                        Doesn't change the fact Qt is a bloated pos.
                        W00t? Get your facts straight... Qt is one of the fastest C++ frameworks out there (I remember a benchmark once that showed that Qt's overhead over plain C++ was only a few %). For most handy desktop applications written in Qt the shared libs take only around 30MiB of RAM.

                        You might be mistaking Qt for KDE, many people make that false assumption that because KDE is written in Qt and it's not too fast (although I have no problems with the performance of KDE), then they think that it's Qt's fault. It's not - KDE is large on it's own and much of it's percieved "slowness" on low end machines is attributed to useful KDE services running in the background, like Nepomuk, KIO, etc, which are there by design - KDE is not meant for low performance desktops.

                        If anything - Qt is not bloated.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Qt is not bloated, but modular and light enough to be used in embedded devices. For example:

                          Beaglebone: Example Qt Embedded Linux Application

                          This is the third video in a set of three on Qt application development on the Beaglebone or any other embedded Linux device. The first video introduces the LCD module that I used and the second video is where I set up a full toolchain for C++ Qt application development under embedded Linux (Qt for embedded devices). This toolchain allows us to cross compile Qt applications for the Beaglebone, deploy the applications directly to the beaglebone with a single click and even use remote debugging using gdbserver to diagnose any problems with our applications. The main use of this platform is for GUI application development when a LCD module, or external display is present.

                          In this the final video in this series I demonstrate an example application that uses an accelerometer and LED to act as output/input devices and I provide the full source code. I explain how the source code is structured and how the physical circuit was configured.

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNvOyY9zK1o

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Original Article
                            Other praise that Dirk had for the Qt tool-kit included the qmake build system
                            Which is actually being phased out once Qbs is ready, probably when it starts to be used to compile Qt itself inhouse.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cyber Killer View Post
                              Qt is one of the fastest C++ frameworks out there
                              Since Qt5, Qt isn't real C++ framework as Javascript(QML) is main language, Widgets are in maintenance and C++ became second class citizen. Javascript requires JIT compiler and garbage collector which are bloat C++ applications don't need.
                              Javascript is much more defective language than C++. It is stupid idea to write one application in two incompatible languages.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X