4 ms·

> Now that he knows for a fact that GUIs can be fast, he'll be suffering for the rest of his life when a GUI app is slow for any reason. Not only slow GUIs but

> Now that he knows for a fact that GUIs can be fast, he'll be suffering for the rest of his life when a GUI app is slow for any reason. Not only slow GUIs but GUIs that demand tens or hundreds of MBs just to draw a few items

bitwize 6y ago
GUI libraries are heavyweight for a reason: lightweight GUIs do not adequately address accessibility, or internationalization. If you were on my software project, and you weren't using native controls on macOS or Windows, one of the big two on Linux, or Electron, you'd better have a damn good reason.
- BlueTemplar 6y ago
  Humm, what about Qt ? Or video games ?
  - bitwize 6y ago
    Qt uses native controls on Windows or Mac. Not ideally, but it's a viable solution. And it's one of Linux's big two. Video games count as a damn good reason.
    - jokethrowaway 6y ago
      Qt doesn't use native controls, they're lookalike. The point of the comment asking about Qt is most likely that Qt is not heavyweight (it does a great job even on embedded.), therefore pointing out that there is a difference between Qt and the other you mentioned. I'm not a fan of OOP and I think there are more interesting framework model - but Qt is definitely the best and most efficient GUI framework I've had the pleasure to work with.
- avhon1 6y ago
  This isn't necessarily true; FreePascal's LCL integrates with native accessibility frameworks: > The LCL should automatically provide accessibility for all of its standard controls, or allow the underlying widgetset to provide its own accessibility for the controls utilized directly from the widgetset. https://wiki.freepascal.org/LCL_Accessibility https://wiki.freepascal.org/LCL_Accessibility
- emptyparadise 6y ago
  Accessibility and internationalization are both very important, but I think it's possible to have both without bringing in an entire browser engine.
- inetknght 6y ago
  > GUI libraries are heavyweight for a reason: lightweight GUIs do not adequately address accessibility, or internationalization. GUIs don't need to be heavyweight to be accessible or internationalized (excepting for text translations, which should be downloaded rather than installed)
  - jan_Inkepa 6y ago
    Why should text translations be downloaded rather than installed? Oh, you mean not included by default in the installer? I'm not sure why that's very material here.
  - wyattpeak 6y ago
    I suspect the parent isn't talking about theoretical implementations but choosing an existing GUI framework for a project. I don't know much about GUIs but lightweight tools often fail to take accessibility into account, and hand-rolled tools almost always do.
- selfhoster11 6y ago
  Win32 has accessibility and localization both, yet pure Win32 API programming results in tiny binaries that use a negligible amount of RAM compared to modern frameworks.

bitwize 6y ago

GUI libraries are heavyweight for a reason: lightweight GUIs do not adequately address accessibility, or internationalization. If you were on my software project, and you weren't using native controls on macOS or Windows, one of the big two on Linux, or Electron, you'd better have a damn good reason.

BlueTemplar 6y ago
Humm, what about Qt ? Or video games ?
- bitwize 6y ago
  Qt uses native controls on Windows or Mac. Not ideally, but it's a viable solution. And it's one of Linux's big two. Video games count as a damn good reason.
  - jokethrowaway 6y ago
    Qt doesn't use native controls, they're lookalike. The point of the comment asking about Qt is most likely that Qt is not heavyweight (it does a great job even on embedded.), therefore pointing out that there is a difference between Qt and the other you mentioned. I'm not a fan of OOP and I think there are more interesting framework model - but Qt is definitely the best and most efficient GUI framework I've had the pleasure to work with.
avhon1 6y ago
This isn't necessarily true; FreePascal's LCL integrates with native accessibility frameworks: > The LCL should automatically provide accessibility for all of its standard controls, or allow the underlying widgetset to provide its own accessibility for the controls utilized directly from the widgetset. https://wiki.freepascal.org/LCL_Accessibility https://wiki.freepascal.org/LCL_Accessibility
emptyparadise 6y ago
Accessibility and internationalization are both very important, but I think it's possible to have both without bringing in an entire browser engine.
inetknght 6y ago
> GUI libraries are heavyweight for a reason: lightweight GUIs do not adequately address accessibility, or internationalization. GUIs don't need to be heavyweight to be accessible or internationalized (excepting for text translations, which should be downloaded rather than installed)
- jan_Inkepa 6y ago
  Why should text translations be downloaded rather than installed? Oh, you mean not included by default in the installer? I'm not sure why that's very material here.
- wyattpeak 6y ago
  I suspect the parent isn't talking about theoretical implementations but choosing an existing GUI framework for a project. I don't know much about GUIs but lightweight tools often fail to take accessibility into account, and hand-rolled tools almost always do.
selfhoster11 6y ago
Win32 has accessibility and localization both, yet pure Win32 API programming results in tiny binaries that use a negligible amount of RAM compared to modern frameworks.