5 ms·
Most of these are limited to the point of uselesness.
by rapsey 8y ago
Most of these are limited to the point of uselesness.
- doubleunplussed 8y agoI ship nontrivial PyQt apps. PyQt can basically do anything Qt can do. Multiple inheritance of QWidgets can be dicey, but desired results can usually be achieved by defining mixins that don't subclass QWidget. It works brilliantly, far from "the point of uselessness". For me, cross platform GUIs are a solved problem, and I really can't wrap my head around all the noise to the contrary, or the claims that electron is what saved us.
- rapsey 8y agoYeah that is why I said C++ and python...
- doubleunplussed 8y agoApologies, didn't see that
- billfruit 8y agoPython QT bindings are poorly documented, much of the documentation is out of date. Also it appears to me, far too much churn.
- doubleunplussed 8y agoI don't use PyQt's documentation (wasn't even aware it really existed), it's such a literal wrapper that you can just use Qt's documentation. And the only churn was a change about five years ago from a less pythonic API (using wrapped Qt types for most things) to a more pythonic one (using Python's native types where it makes sense). And that wasn't even that bad. Other than that it has no more churn than Qt itself does.
- grawprog 8y agoI use the D bindings to qt regularly when I'm not using dlangui for GUI.
- aerique 8y agoThe Common Lisp bindings (EQL) are solid as well.
- pknopf 8y agoI am the author of Qml.Net. With it, you have the full power of .NET Core and QML. There really isn't any limits. https://github.com/qmlnet/qmlnet https://github.com/qmlnet/qmlnet