Wireshark Is Being Ported From GTK+ To Qt

[Luke_Wolf]

They are, and yet no one bothers to use doesnt-look-likeass themes. So, as a developer you can discuss those mythical themes for all I care, but don't blame end-users for saying Qt looks ridiculously 90's.

you sure you're not thinking about GTK apps running under Qt? Qt default theme looks nothing like the 90s

compare:

[Ancurio]

Learning Vala and how to use it - no thanks, I'd better waste my time learning useful stuff, not another C++ replacement wannabe.

You either a) don't know what Vala is or b) suffer from dyslexia. The link I provided has a compiled Win32 bundle in it,
the fact that Vala is bundled with it is moot. The comment I replied to said "gtk3 hasn't been ported to Windows",
which I just disproved.

[boudewijnrempt]

I have never programmed using Qt before and after reading this article I got motivated enough and wanted to see how it compares to gtk. Turns out I never got as far as writing any code at all. I could not even get started! All they seems to care about is advertising Qt Creator all over the documentation and tutorial pages. What is wrong with a few lines of "hello world" code and a simple gcc command to compile it like they have for gtk. To me Qt now feels extremely bloated, not simple at all and especially not particularly great. The only thing lacking with gtk is proper cross platform support.

On the other hand, if you'd be able to get over the "eek, qt creator!" reflex, you'd be able to install it on your favourite distro, start it, click on the examples tab of the startup page, type "hello" in the search field and get your basic hello world example loaded up and ready to inspect, tweak and run.

How much more simple could life be? But to make it even simpler, here's the example:

#include <QApplication>
#include <QPushButton>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    QPushButton hello("Hello world!");
    hello.resize(100, 30);
    hello.show();
    return app.exec();
}

[stqn]

Go ahead. Qt looks much better than gtk.

The only obvious difference between a Qt and a GTK+ app to me is the way you can (GTK) or can’t (Qt) select the text in a field by clicking and moving the mouse pointer upwards or downwards. Which is one reason why I prefer GTK apps.

Edit: and they look more or less the same when configured to use the same theme, but I have to agree that generally GTK apps look better than Qt apps.

[Silverthorn]

Advantage of Qt: non-trivial application is fast to develop if developer is experienced and doesn't have to e.g. read Qt documentation most time.
Disadvantage: Digia doesn't really care about Linux which means Linux specific bug can take months or years to fix.
Qt Creator isn't necessary for hello world, but it is useful for bigger applications.

I am probably only interested in trivial applications and I prefer to use separate applications instead of big and cumbersome IDE:s. Cross platform is a big plus for Qt.

http://qt-project.org/wiki/GettingStarted

clearly you didn't bother to search through the documentation enough, and yes they advertise using Qt Creator however just really? you're getting hung up over the fact that they're trying to make it easy on beginners by having them just click a large green go button rather than typing in commands at a prompt? Yes you can do it from the command line if you really want to or use alternative build systems like CMake and QBS however do you really want to throw all that extra complexity at a newbie?

Also if you really want to learn Qt rather than just troll http://www.ics.com/design-patterns#.UmARWRBV9ao is a great book.

But why should an IDE be the only way for a beginner to get started? It just indicates that the procedure to get started is unnecessary complicated hence my frustration.

"do you really want to throw all that extra complexity at a newbie?" Gtk manges just fine without said complexity so why is it not possible for Qt?

Took a quick peak at the book and it seems to be a bit heavy on the c++ side and not covering much of Qt. Enough to get started maybe.

Also I am not trolling. A bit frustrated after I failed my first attempt maybe, thought I have not given up just yet. Qt is "known" for its simplicity and I was probably hoping for something a bit more easy to digest for a beginner.

You obviously didn't look very hard:

http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.8/gettingstartedqt.html

To be fair, this is for Qt 4.8. On the other hand, there are no tutorials at all for gtk3.

And there is this for QML:

http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5.1/qtquick/qml-tutorial.html

And this is a bit more advanced, but also doesn't use Qt Creator.

http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5.1/qtwidgets/tutorials-addressbook.html

In fact the only major tutorial that uses Qt Creator is this one:

http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5.1/qtdoc/gettingstartedqt.html

And it does explain how to build and run the application at the very end.

I tried to look through the official page for some simple example to get me started but I just ended up on the starting page again pointing me towards Qt creator. A bit frustrating after a while. You probably get a better experience once you get to know the page better.

This page (plus the reference manual) was enough to get me started with gtk:

https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/stable/gtk-getting-started.html

Thank you for the links. I looked at the QML page before and it did make sense to me although I am probably more interested in getting Qt Widget running.

"In fact the only major tutorial that uses Qt Creator is this one" This is the page you repeatedly get to when searching for a simple and official getting started tutorial.

The 4.8 link is precisely what I was looking for.

----------
Guess I have enough reading material now to get me started on my next Qt endeavour.
Thanks for the help...

[Silverthorn]

On the other hand, if you'd be able to get over the "eek, qt creator!" reflex, you'd be able to install it on your favourite distro, start it, click on the examples tab of the startup page, type "hello" in the search field and get your basic hello world example loaded up and ready to inspect, tweak and run.

How much more simple could life be? But to make it even simpler, here's the example:

#include <QApplication>
#include <QPushButton>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    QApplication app(argc, argv);
    QPushButton hello("Hello world!");
    hello.resize(100, 30);
    hello.show();
    return app.exec();
}

Haha, ["eek, qt creator!" reflex]. It truly was my first reaction after spending some time with the online documentation.

What is wrong with the tools I already have and are comfortable with. Why do I need an entire IDE for something as simple as putting a few windows and buttons on the screen. Why not put the example on the documentation page instead of hiding it in an application.


Edit:
And to be a bit more on topic..
I guess we can expect more project getting subjugated towards Qt considering how stubborn Gnome has behaved recently and with the somewhat lacking of cross platform compatibility from gtk.

[boudewijnrempt]

What is wrong with the tools I already have and are comfortable with. Why do I need an entire IDE for something as simple as putting a few windows and buttons on the screen. Why not put the example on the documentation page instead of hiding it in an application.

Well, it took a bit of time for me too... I started out with vi (official company editor in the 90s, imagine whole corridors of coders pressing Esc time and again, the whole office ringing with audible bells), used nedit and xemacs... And I still don't build inside qt creator, I do that from a terminal, but for moving around code, it's the option that makes me most productive. It's a really good editor, these days.

But you don't need it -- all you need is a terminal, any editor, a compiler and the right tutorial or example.

But on the other hand, for years and years and years (well, at least a decade), the main complaint about developing on Linux was "it's harder than on Windows! There's no integrated development environment and all the documentation is about editors and command lines!" That complaint is now well and truly out of date.

[oleid]

you sure you're not thinking about GTK apps running under Qt? Qt default theme looks nothing like the 90s

compare:

You may not run Qt on KDE. Otherwise, you don't see the default theme. By the way, the same is true for GTK+.

But obviously the whole theming discussion is nonsense

[Ericg]

Haha, ["eek, qt creator!" reflex]. It truly was my first reaction after spending some time with the online documentation.

What is wrong with the tools I already have and are comfortable with. Why do I need an entire IDE for something as simple as putting a few windows and buttons on the screen. Why not put the example on the documentation page instead of hiding it in an application.


Edit:
And to be a bit more on topic..
I guess we can expect more project getting subjugated towards Qt considering how stubborn Gnome has behaved recently and with the somewhat lacking of cross platform compatibility from gtk.

You can write Qt apps to your heart's content in a text editor... but then you gotta handle everything yourself. Are you gonna complain about writing a .NET app and being forced to use Visual Studio? How about a java app and complaining that you dont want to use NetBeans or Eclipse or whatever? KDE App and you don't want to use Qt Creator OR KDevelop?

Qt Creator is there so that you can write the CODE yourself, you CAN write the GUI yourself (or you can use the designer and it will handle it for you), it will also handle automatically updating Cmake files if you add new files and the likes.

You can do everything yourself if you want... but its gonna take a lot longer and you probably aren't gonna get the result you want unless you are REALLY careful and do a lot of trial and error.

Personally, I LOVE Qt Creator (Very much waiting for the new version thats finally shipping with a depend on Qt5 so I can do QtQuick 2 in it) I use it for everything, its basically become my Go-To app for C or C++ coding instead of Eclipse or Code::Blocks.

[Ancurio]

"do you really want to throw all that extra complexity at a newbie?" Gtk manges just fine without said complexity so why is it not possible for Qt?
.

mkdir qt-example && cd qt-example/
cat > main.cpp
#include <QTextStream>
int main(int, char**)
{
	QTextStream out(stdout);
	out << "Hello World\n";
	return 0;
}

qmake -project
qmake
make

Or, if you absolutely insist on not using qmake:

g++ main.cpp -o hello `pkg-config --libs --cflags QtCore`