Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KernelShark 1.0 Released After Switching From GTK To Qt

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

  • KernelShark 1.0 Released After Switching From GTK To Qt

    Phoronix: KernelShark 1.0 Released After Switching From GTK To Qt

    KernelShark 1.0 has been released as the tool for visualizing Trace-cmd Linux kernel traces...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...k-1.0-Released

  • #2
    Another one is leaving the sinking ship.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Candy View Post
      Another one is leaving the sinking ship.
      There's no sinking ship, Qt just serves better for writing cross-platform (GNOME, KDE, etc) applications.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Britoid View Post

        There's no sinking ship, Qt just serves better for writing cross-platform (GNOME, KDE, etc) applications.
        I wish that QT had as many bindings as GTK.

        Comment


        • #5
          I wish that QT had as many bindings as GTK.
          I whis that GTK had as many up to date and complete bindings as Qt.

          Comment


          • #6
            I understand it. These days, GTK is worse than ever. It sucks! Apps not only have issues migrating to newer GTK versions, but the toolkit evolves very slowly.

            Comment


            • #7
              Gtk is really a nice Toolkit, it's C++bindings are not stuck in C++98,like Qt. From that point of view, Qt really stucks. And Qt is more a framework, which replaces STL instead of using it, like gtk's c++ bindings do.

              Qt on the other hand has a more complete set of widgets and more really nice add-on widgets,especially scientific ones.

              I'm looking forward to Gtk4. It's seems to come along nicely.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by msotirov
                Gtk4 so far seems like a hobby project Like the rest of Gnome.
                How do you come to that conclusion? And even if it was, Linux was a hobby project for a long time, too. There is nothing bad about hobby projects.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by oleid View Post
                  Gtk is really a nice Toolkit, it's C++bindings are not stuck in C++98,like Qt. From that point of view, Qt really stucks. And Qt is more a framework, which replaces STL instead of using it, like gtk's c++ bindings do.
                  About the STL: this is due to history. Qt is old. like 1995 old. At that time, C++ support was flaky across platforms. And the STL was in even worse shape. Which is why Qt rolled its own. You can use STL containers in your Qt program.
                  Carefully written code can use Qt and STL containers interchangeably.

                  Comment


                  • #10

                    Originally posted by msotirov
                    Qt on the other hand is much more professionally done (from the code itself all the way to documentation and tooling) but it's also an enterprise product by a large corporation selling it to other large corporations.
                    The documentation of Qt is quite nice, but still far from perfect. Being an enterprise product is good on the one hand (tooling, documentation, stable code base), but bad in the other (decisions are based on enterprise decisions, not community ; code is stale). Recent development of Qt was mostly QML and Android stuff, the classic widget codebase didn't change much since Qt4. That's why it got forked some two years ago to get rid of MOC and use C++14 throughout the codebase.

                    Originally posted by Serafean View Post

                    About the STL: this is due to history. Qt is old. like 1995 old. At that time, C++ support was flaky across platforms. And the STL was in even worse shape. Which is why Qt rolled its own. You can use STL containers in your Qt program.
                    Carefully written code can use Qt and STL containers interchangeably.
                    That's true (if you're writing templaized code, which is not always what you want) , but nevertheless it feels quite archaic and strange, if you're used to modern C++. In the c++ podcasts I listen to, they wondered why there are so little Qt people on c++ conferences and they assumed, that's due to Qt having it's own kind of C++.
                    Last edited by oleid; 07-27-2019, 05:17 PM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X