Rapid Photo Downloader For Linux Switches From GTK To Qt

[SpyroRyder]

Not necessarily. When you prevent misuse, you get complaints that you're not offering enough flexibility. That's just how programming works.

Though it is interesting that GTK foregoes C++, a language with OOP capabilities, and then goes on to implement GObject...

Is it really that interesting though considering it's the same old language preferences argument that's been had since C++'s inception?

[SpyroRyder]

If it is so easy to badly write program using gtk then maybe it is a sign of design flaws?

Why do you think they redesigned a lot of things with GTK3, both the initial release 6 years ago and over it's lifetime. They've even changed their release pattern for GTK4, which introduces many changes in the basic rendering of the toolkit, so that things that one of the bigger things people complained about GTK3, major breakage per release, shouldn't happen.

[Mavman]

Many applications still depend on Qt4... Moving between major versions of Qt is not easier.

I think they're getting better at it (Or so i heard... :P)

[Mavman]

I dream of a QT-based Gnome... (hey, dreaming never hurted anyone, plus you get free flamebait points.)

Ahahahahaha. Good one!!!!

(Just be sure no GTK-fanboy reads this...)

[-MacNuke-]

Many applications still depend on Qt4... Moving between major versions of Qt is not easier.

[halo9en]

GTK is an ugly abomination.

I dream of a QT-based Gnome... (hey, dreaming never hurted anyone, plus you get free flamebait points.)

[bug77]

If it is so easy to badly write program using gtk then maybe it is a sign of design flaws?

Not necessarily. When you prevent misuse, you get complaints that you're not offering enough flexibility. That's just how programming works.

Though it is interesting that GTK foregoes C++, a language with OOP capabilities, and then goes on to implement GObject...

[bitman]

Language choices matter, people writing Qt3 and Qt4 mostly wrote in C++, with Qt's metric ton of custom basic types. Considering C++ is one of GTK3's weaker languages, porting one of those is a big ask with very little gain. Particularly as the amount of Linux-specific Qt programs isn't many. But sure we can't discount the surly GTK devs, who were quite impossible to work with, although that was partially because some of those GTK2 programs were quite badly written and people were blaming GTK3 that their bad code wasn't going to cut it anymore. However from my few interactions with the current lot you have far less of the "my way or the highway" types and particularly some of the newer ones seem to be far more should you be polite in their direction first.

If it is so easy to badly write program using gtk then maybe it is a sign of design flaws?

[SpyroRyder]

So many applications switching from GTK2 to Qt5. Don't think anybody switched from Qt4 to Gtk3 though.

Language choices matter, people writing Qt3 and Qt4 mostly wrote in C++, with Qt's metric ton of custom basic types. Considering C++ is one of GTK3's weaker languages, porting one of those is a big ask with very little gain. Particularly as the amount of Linux-specific Qt programs isn't many. But sure we can't discount the surly GTK devs, who were quite impossible to work with, although that was partially because some of those GTK2 programs were quite badly written and people were blaming GTK3 that their bad code wasn't going to cut it anymore. However from my few interactions with the current lot you have far less of the "my way or the highway" types and particularly some of the newer ones seem to be far more should you be polite in their direction first.

[stikonas]

So many applications switching from GTK2 to Qt5. Don't think anybody switched from Qt4 to Gtk3 though.