3 ms·
I’m not the parent poster, I’m just tryin go to grab this opportunity that I “met” someone so familiar with GTK :) Could you please share your opinion on the t
by kaba0 3y ago
I’m not the parent poster, I’m just tryin go to grab this opportunity that I “met” someone so familiar with GTK :)
Could you please share your opinion on the toolkit, and its relation to others? Also, I heard that there were quite a lot of tech debt in GTK3 and part of the reason why GTK4 came as a bigger update is to fix those — what would you say, was it successful? Or is there still some legacy decisions that harm the project somewhat?
- audidude 3y ago> Also, I heard that there were quite a lot of tech debt in GTK3 and part of the reason why GTK4 came as a bigger update is to fix those GTK 3 itself was trying to lose the tech debt of 2.x (which in turn 1.x). But they were still all wrapping a fundamentally crap API of X11 for graphics in this century. GTK 4 changed that, and it now wraps a Wayland model of API. That drastically simplified GDK, which is why I could write a macOS backend in a couple of weeks. It also completely changed how we draw. We no longer do immediate mode style (in the form of Cairo) and instead do a retained mode of draw commands. That allows for lots of new things you just couldn't do before with the old drawing model. It will also allow us to do a lot more fun things in the future (like threaded/tiled renderers). The APIs all over the place were simplified and focused. I can't imagine writing an application the size of GNOME Builder again with anything less than GTK 4. Hell, last GNOME cycle I rewrote Sysprof from scratch in a couple months, and it's become my co-pilot every day.
- kaba0 3y agoThanks for the comment and for your work!