Am 03.12.2011, 19:20 Uhr, schrieb Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a>:
"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message
news:jbdp5t$2j0k$1...@digitalmars.com...
"Gour" <g...@atmarama.net> wrote in message
news:20111203075455.6d9d1...@atmarama.noip.me...
"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote:
I agree the look of apps should be user-configurable, but that
belongs at the OS/Window-Manager level. 'Course, I'll grant that's
never going to happen on MS or Apple platforms, in which case, yea,
using a lib that makes "system" the default and "user-configured" an
option is the next best thing.
I fully agree with things which you said above...not liking this
mobile/web hype pushed to us at the moment.
Just, curious what would be your choise for multi-platform GU app: gtk,
qt or wx?
My ranking would be:
#1: wx: Because it uses native controls on pretty much all platforms.
#2: qt: Because for a non-native UI, it at least does a good job of
getting the look & feel right. And I've heard that the API is nice.
.
.
.
#84,259,254: gtk: Because it doesn't give a rat's ass about native
anything, plus it's just plain ugly (read: big-n-chunky) on all
platforms,
even Gnome.
FWIW, SWT would probably be somewhere in the top 3, definitely above qt
(because I *think* SWT is true native...?), but not sure how I'd rank it
compared to wx b/c I'd have to actually try them both out.
As far as I understood it SWT was written for Eclipse. It may fall behind
the other toolkits in terms of features and it is written in Java, so
using it means a true D reimplementation of the API unless someone already
did a C port. I think the small and native aspect made it a good candidate
for inclusion into Phobos in the past. The much other toolkits are just
too big.
We may all have good eyes and such, but maybe the accessibility aspect
should also be considered in this discussion.
