Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 65

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

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Emdek View Post
    @anda_skoa, yeah, QtQuick and stuff, for me they mean almost one and the same thing (since they are closely related), but yeah, they are not exactly the same thing. ;-)
    The two technology names are often used synonymous but they are not. One is basically the enabled of the other. A bit like C++ and Qt not being the same thing. Qt implies C++, C++ does not imply Qt.

    QML is, for example, also being used on BlackBerry's BB10 platform, which does not use QtQuick.
    QML can also be used for QtWidget programming. E.g. see https://conf.kde.org/en/Akademy2013/public/events/20

    Cheers,
    _

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    You can't use hardware accelerated QML widgets in C++ application without using QML language and Javascript. Using QML and Javascript during runtime isn't necessary.
    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.

    Non-trival QML application is written in 3 languages: QML, Javascript, C++. C++ and Javascript are incompatible with each other. You can't e.g. use regular C++ classes in Javascript code.
    Javascript is very defective language compared to C++ because it is dynamically typed, prototype based, JIT compiled, garbage collected.
    QML has syntax that is similar to JavaScript, but it is just QML, but there is no actual JavaScript in there. Also you can use Qt classes from QML. You can even access Qt in the two JavaScript engines Qt has (QtScript and QtWebKit).
    Last edited by carewolf; 01-12-2014 at 03:43 PM.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Initially I was skeptical about the whole Qml/Javascript stuff, but having used it for while I think it's totally the future. For those people saying that you can't write large/complex programs using Qml then take a look at Pixeluvo - 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.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ancurio View Post
    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.


    Also, for people complaining about javascript - his project does not use QML. Though he stuck it in as something he wanted to look into for the future, to get it running on tablets and phones, but that there was a lot of work to do before that could happen.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 01-12-2014 at 06:58 PM.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    196

    Default

    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.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newwen View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Nille_kungen; 01-13-2014 at 12:07 AM.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Kansas.
    Posts
    263

    Default

    Yeah. I personally think the biggest weakness is that GTK looks bad on a non-gtk DE(KDE, razor, Windows, Macintosh) while qt will looks native everywhere.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    http://krita.org
    Posts
    11

    Default

    http://lwn.net/Articles/562856/ makes clear what GTK+ is for according to the people working on it:

    "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.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ua=42 View Post
    Yeah. I personally think the biggest weakness is that GTK looks bad on a non-gtk DE(KDE, razor, Windows, Macintosh) while qt will looks native everywhere.
    /me is using an Xlib-based WM, and there is no such thing as "native look"

    Both look bad with their default themes.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    /me is using an Xlib-based WM, and there is no such thing as "native look"

    Both look bad with their default themes.
    Qt 5 adds Fusion, a new (non-native) style to look same everywhere.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •