Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

techprophet · 2009-10-14 00:56:42

Personally, I prefer Qt4 (both because it's C++ and because I like the way the widgets look better). What do you guys think?

Aaaaaaaaaaaand GO!!!!

scio · 2009-10-14 01:01:31

Qt4 for me as well, it just makes C++ so much easier and handles all the cross platform nonsense for you.

Ranguvar · 2009-10-14 01:34:36

I have no experience in either, but I wouldn't say C++ is an advantage of Qt unless you actually code the widget platform itself, as GTK has C++ bindings
Of course, Qt might be nicer than Gtk's C++, but that's separate.

Last edited by Ranguvar (2009-10-14 01:34:59)

mikesd · 2009-10-14 01:42:27

I like Gtk and am using the PyGtk bindings at the moment. PyGtk makes quick prototyping fast and easy. It has been a while since I have used Qt but it struck me as fairly solid. It also has PyQt but I haven't used it. I used Gtkmm once which is the C++ binding for gtk and it was OK.

Lich · 2009-10-14 05:14:31

QT sucks. Also widgets look as good as the theme. if you run a GTK app with the default theme, expect it to look like sh*t

schuay · 2009-10-14 05:39:15

Qt because of the awesome QtCreator

Mikko777 · 2009-10-14 07:08:49

Lich wrote:

QT sucks. Also widgets look as good as the theme. if you run a GTK app with the default theme, expect it to look like sh*t

Fail! You just proved that QT > gtk. (If you run qt app it always looks good gtk apps not so much)

Lich · 2009-10-14 08:47:34

Mikko777 wrote:

Lich wrote:
QT sucks. Also widgets look as good as the theme. if you run a GTK app with the default theme, expect it to look like sh*t
Fail! You just proved that QT > gtk. (If you run qt app it always looks good gtk apps not so much)

All I said is that the default gtk theme sucks, and it does. But I don't think there's many GTK "lovers" that stick to the default anyway. Just because QT comes with a better default theme doesn't make QT better. It will always suck in my eyes.

Last edited by Lich (2009-10-14 08:47:52)

Nezmer · 2009-10-14 09:28:13

you guys should run "pacman -Rsncu qt" or "pacman -Rsncu gtk2" before calling either one names .

Lich · 2009-10-14 11:12:08

ターミナル (~) $ pacman -Qi qt
error: package "qt" not found
ターミナル (~) $

Last edited by Lich (2009-10-14 11:12:54)

Mikko777 · 2009-10-14 11:19:14

Lich wrote:

Mikko777 wrote:
Lich wrote:
QT sucks. Also widgets look as good as the theme. if you run a GTK app with the default theme, expect it to look like sh*t
Fail! You just proved that QT > gtk. (If you run qt app it always looks good gtk apps not so much)
All I said is that the default gtk theme sucks, and it does. But I don't think there's many GTK "lovers" that stick to the default anyway. Just because QT comes with a better default theme doesn't make QT better. It will always suck in my eyes.

And all I didn't say but ment is that QT can use gtk themes and gtk cannot use qt themes.
Thus qt wins on the native look theming contest.

Lich · 2009-10-14 11:43:29

w/e

Mazur · 2009-10-14 11:50:02

Qt and C++ is the best thing I saw ever for programming GUI.

samjh · 2009-10-14 12:41:43

Depends on which programming language. For C++, Qt by a million miles. For Python, either is fine. For any others, GTK+.

Last edited by samjh (2009-10-14 12:42:44)

scio · 2009-10-14 12:43:00

Lich wrote:

QT sucks. Also widgets look as good as the theme. if you run a GTK app with the default theme, expect it to look like sh*t

A very compelling argument, but I would have to disagree. Also, this is a question about writing programs not how things looks with their default theme.

I have only read documentation and fixed bugs in GTK, but have written full applications from scratch in Qt. The documentation for Qt is fantastic and makes life much easier.

Lich · 2009-10-14 12:48:46

scio wrote:

Lich wrote:
QT sucks. Also widgets look as good as the theme. if you run a GTK app with the default theme, expect it to look like sh*t
A very compelling argument, but I would have to disagree. Also, this is a question about writing programs not how things looks with their default theme.
I have only read documentation and fixed bugs in GTK, but have written full applications from scratch in Qt. The documentation for Qt is fantastic and makes life much easier.

That wasn't my argument, it was a reply for the guy before me . Code in whatever you'd like, but don't tell me GTK doesn't have a good documentation. C# compared to C makes your life way easier too, but that doesn't make it better

Last edited by Lich (2009-10-14 12:50:07)

Zeist · 2009-10-14 12:53:27

I generally prefer Qt, mostly out of habit though.

Lich · 2009-10-14 13:26:23

http://celettu.wordpress.com/2009/06/08 … onclusion/
Lovely conclusion

SpeedVin · 2009-10-14 13:34:12

Nice thread
Yesterday I wanted to ask for same thing (really!).
What do you think (I'm now talking about Python).
Which libaries will be faster QT or GTK (I don't talk about eating resources but what libary will be faster)

Lich · 2009-10-14 13:38:01

I only have experience with PyGTK, but I found it to do a good job when it comes to "normal" applications (only wrote stuff for my own use). The only problem I had with GTK under Python were text lists, when I had a HUGE amount of lines, it was really slow. Probably my fault though

techprophet · 2009-10-14 13:38:20

Faster as in faster to code? Qt for me because of familiarity. But I can't say for sure. If you have to sub-class anything, Qt works beautifully. I have 4 very specialized subclasses in my project, and after you figure out how to do it, it's really easy.

SpeedVin · 2009-10-14 13:40:23

techprophet wrote:

Faster as in faster to code? Qt for me because of familiarity. But I can't say for sure. If you have to sub-class anything, Qt works beautifully. I have 4 very specialized subclasses in my project, and after you figure out how to do it, it's really easy.

No I talk about that what Lich (Thanks) said (That is what I mean by fast)

Last edited by SpeedVin (2009-10-14 13:48:32)

scio · 2009-10-14 14:20:44

Lich wrote:

http://celettu.wordpress.com/2009/06/08 … onclusion/
Lovely conclusion

Sorry but:

TFA wrote:

1) There's more GTK software out there than Qt software. I don't have any numbers to back this up, and I notice Qt-apps is quite active.

Then he proceeds to base all his conclusions on the fact that there's more GTK software than Qt software. Granted this may be true, especially since Qt only recently adopted the LGPL.

Also:

TFA wrote:

Some people thought that I thought GTK is a superior toolkit than QT. I don't. Actually, wouldn't know what seperates them on a technical level. All I looked at were applications.

So again, this doesn't apply to the thread. He only looks at current applications, not writing one.

SpeedVin wrote:

Which libaries will be faster QT or GTK (I don't talk about eating resources but what libary will be faster)

It depends on what you are doing, I've never had a problem with Qt applications being slow, same for GTK. But I've only done high performance applications in Qt.

SpeedVin · 2009-10-14 16:10:37

I just readed some infos about GTK vs QT and look what I find:
http://www.wikivs.com/wiki/Qt_vs_GTK
I think I have to try Qt

Arch Linux

#1 2009-10-14 00:56:42

Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#2 2009-10-14 01:01:31

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#3 2009-10-14 01:34:36

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#4 2009-10-14 01:42:27

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#5 2009-10-14 05:14:31

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#6 2009-10-14 05:39:15

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#7 2009-10-14 07:08:49

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#8 2009-10-14 08:47:34

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#9 2009-10-14 09:28:13

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#10 2009-10-14 11:12:08

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#11 2009-10-14 11:19:14

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#12 2009-10-14 11:43:29

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#13 2009-10-14 11:50:02

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#14 2009-10-14 12:41:43

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#15 2009-10-14 12:43:00

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#16 2009-10-14 12:48:46

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#17 2009-10-14 12:53:27

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#18 2009-10-14 13:26:23

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#19 2009-10-14 13:34:12

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#20 2009-10-14 13:38:01

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#21 2009-10-14 13:38:20

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#22 2009-10-14 13:40:23

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#23 2009-10-14 14:20:44

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

#24 2009-10-14 16:10:37

Re: Would you rather write a program in GTK+ or Qt4, and why?

Board footer