[kusti8]

Hey. I'm the author. It's hard to find a simple example that everyone understands but can show capabilities. If you're used to Qt then you're going to like Qt better, but I mainly developed this for people who want to use React. You are obviously free to use whatever you want.

But if you have any suggestions let me know!

[mstade]

I have zero experience with Qt, but I'm pretty sure I can follow along with the examples anyway. (I do have experience with React, JS, and Python.)

It seems to me you're making a syntax comparison and using shorter as an argument for Proton Native, yet the example is obviously not shorter so it's factually incorrect. My suggestion is you don't use shorter as an argument. Aside from being incorrect, it's probably not very useful since a few characters here and there doesn't necessarily mean one is more or less complicated than the other – which I presume is what you're really trying to convey.

I'd probably refrain from using syntax comparison (mostly a matter of preference and familiarity anyway) and instead show why Proton Native is obviously less complex than Qt (or other options, if that matters.)

[kusti8]

Yeah I'll reword that. My bad.

[mstade]

Oh, I forgot – it's probably worth considering using examples written in the same programming language as well.

[jcelerier]

Here's your Hello World in real Qt code for reference:

    import QtQuick 2.7
    import QtQuick.Controls 2.2
    ApplicationWindow
    {
        title: "Example"
        Button {
            height: 300
            width: 300 
            x: 50
            y: 50 // not represented in the react code for some reason

            onClicked: console.log("Hello")
        }
    }

[binthere]

I guess just drop the comparison with Qt or other similar things. Just highlight that you can build native applications using React syntax. This alone is a good argument, no point on comparing, really. Only if you want to compare performance, etc.

[yodon]

The tech sounds fantastic but as you’re learning in this thread you should never criticize the competition. Framing your work as easier to read/write (or whatever) than Qt does nothing but pull yourself and the project into the mud. Just delete all references to Qt on the homepage and focus on what your project does and does well. You’ll find that approach does a much better job of communicating what you actually want to get across to people.

[discreteevent]

I think the 'easier to read' is unfair considering that you didn't use QML fur the Qt example. For me QML is easier to read than JSX (and quantitatively it is less verbose)

[k__]

Is QML declarative?

[discreteevent]

As declarative as JSX

Menu {

  title:qsTr("File")

  MenuItem {

    text: qsTr("&Open")

    onTriggered: console.log("Open action triggered");

  }

}

[petalfig]

Aren't all markup languages declarative by definition?

[jcelerier]

QML isn't only about markup, it also support property binding directly in the language - it's a full-fledged reactive environment.

[k__]

Probably?

[watermans]

Why didn’t you address the claim that you were just straight up lying?

[kusti8]

Because I forgot. I updated the page. My bad.