4 ms·

Fair point. The spacing and margins are totally wrong, for sure. But that's just spacing & margins, and I assume that's easily adjusted (and they should do that

Fair point. The spacing and margins are totally wrong, for sure. But that's just spacing & margins, and I assume that's easily adjusted (and they should do that, so their demo doesn't look ugly). But nonetheless, the widgets are native Cocoa widgets, so they not only look native, they feel and behave native, something you can't say about Qt (at least not to the same degree — although I develop with Qt, love Qt, and have zero issues with the way Qt applications look and feel on Mac).

freakboy3742 12y ago
The spacing and margins are all manually specified (or, in the case of the example, aren't specified at all, so they default to 0). If you cared to do so, this spacing could be manually adjusted. Under the hood, it's 100% native widgets (i.e., on OSX, the code is actually instantiating an NSButton, adding it to an NSView, set as content on an NSWindow; on Ubuntu, it uses Gtk.Button etc), so the look and feel of the widgets themselves are exactly as the platform dictates.
- vsl 12y ago
  "100% native widgets" is the easy part and wxWidgets/wxPython is doing just that (and always have been). Providing higher-level API is harder and again, wx does that too. But the devil is in the detail. The reason why many wx apps don't look very well on OS X is because getting all the tiny details like spacing, behavior, layout etc. right for all supported platforms, with (mostly) same code base is hard - and it has nothing to do with the look of individual widgets. But well, you'll learn that during the journey ;)