4 ms·

> Qt and to some extent GTK+ come close Both are C++: developers are more expensive to hire, and stuff takes more time to develop and debug. I'm proficient in

> Qt and to some extent GTK+ come close Both are C++: developers are more expensive to hire, and stuff takes more time to develop and debug. I'm proficient in C++ (programming for living since 2000), but I wouldn't pick the language for 2D GUIs in 2019. > GTK+ can be programmed in Vala Picking a non-mainstream languages is risky. Harder to find developers. Way more likely to find bugs in the toolchain and these can easily cost weeks to fix.

bonzini 7y ago
You can also write GTK+ in JavaScript for that matter, or Python. Vala is a very underrated language though and it should be very easy for a good JavaScript programmer to pick it up.
- Snetry 7y ago
  Enough languages have bindings for GTK or Qt to make it viable
kleiba 7y ago
but I wouldn't pick the language for 2D GUIs in 2019 Which one would you recommend?
- Const-me 7y ago
  I mostly program for Windows and use C# for the GUI. Cross-platform story is complicated, though. I have good experience creating a custom GUI framework for embedded Linux: drm/kms, gles, NanoVG, [DllImport], everything on top is custom C# code in .NET core 2.2. But that approach is not for everyone. I only needed 10-15 screens with simple GUI on them, it’s a 5” touchscreen with no other user-facing devices. Creating more advanced UX this way would consume too much time. There’re Avalonia and Xamarin. Didn’t used them at that time because I needed full-screen GUI for a single-application Linux, without any desktop environments or user mode OS components. For desktops and especially mobile apps they might work OK. It’s unpopular opinion here, but I think Electron is not that bad for GUI, esp. when writing TypeScript instead of JS. I think it’s similar story to Unity3D or PHP: low entry barrier attracted inexperienced programmers, then the whole ecosystem is judged based on the output of these inexperienced people.
  - kleiba 7y ago
    Great reply, thanks very much!
otabdeveloper2 7y ago
> Both are C++: developers are more expensive to hire, and stuff takes more time to develop and debug. Have you seen the state of Javascript 'ecosystem' and job market?? Both statements are false. The real reason is that C++ toolkits don't have platform and device independence. HTML and CSS are really good and powerful design tools, especially compared to composing raw pixels like you'd (essentially) be forced to do with Qt and GTK.
- ahartmetz 7y ago
  The ignorance in this thread is rather concerning. Let me correct: GTK+ is not C++, it's C. Qt is very cross-platform: it supports about 10 platforms, including Linux, Windows, and macOS. You are not doing anything close to compositing raw pixels in Qt or GTK+. They have layout managers that are specifically made for typical application UIs, and they have lots of ready-made widgets. Qt also has QML, which is a declarative UI descriptions language kind of like HTML/CSS but much more productive because (gasp) it's actually designed from the ground up for applications, not websites.

bonzini 7y ago

You can also write GTK+ in JavaScript for that matter, or Python. Vala is a very underrated language though and it should be very easy for a good JavaScript programmer to pick it up.

Snetry 7y ago
Enough languages have bindings for GTK or Qt to make it viable

kleiba 7y ago

but I wouldn't pick the language for 2D GUIs in 2019 Which one would you recommend?

Const-me 7y ago
I mostly program for Windows and use C# for the GUI. Cross-platform story is complicated, though. I have good experience creating a custom GUI framework for embedded Linux: drm/kms, gles, NanoVG, [DllImport], everything on top is custom C# code in .NET core 2.2. But that approach is not for everyone. I only needed 10-15 screens with simple GUI on them, it’s a 5” touchscreen with no other user-facing devices. Creating more advanced UX this way would consume too much time. There’re Avalonia and Xamarin. Didn’t used them at that time because I needed full-screen GUI for a single-application Linux, without any desktop environments or user mode OS components. For desktops and especially mobile apps they might work OK. It’s unpopular opinion here, but I think Electron is not that bad for GUI, esp. when writing TypeScript instead of JS. I think it’s similar story to Unity3D or PHP: low entry barrier attracted inexperienced programmers, then the whole ecosystem is judged based on the output of these inexperienced people.
- kleiba 7y ago
  Great reply, thanks very much!

otabdeveloper2 7y ago

> Both are C++: developers are more expensive to hire, and stuff takes more time to develop and debug. Have you seen the state of Javascript 'ecosystem' and job market?? Both statements are false. The real reason is that C++ toolkits don't have platform and device independence. HTML and CSS are really good and powerful design tools, especially compared to composing raw pixels like you'd (essentially) be forced to do with Qt and GTK.

ahartmetz 7y ago
The ignorance in this thread is rather concerning. Let me correct: GTK+ is not C++, it's C. Qt is very cross-platform: it supports about 10 platforms, including Linux, Windows, and macOS. You are not doing anything close to compositing raw pixels in Qt or GTK+. They have layout managers that are specifically made for typical application UIs, and they have lots of ready-made widgets. Qt also has QML, which is a declarative UI descriptions language kind of like HTML/CSS but much more productive because (gasp) it's actually designed from the ground up for applications, not websites.