[athiercelin]

I don't know who would willingly pick Qt to do anything. It's a massive pain in the ass to use, the licensing is expensive and convoluted, and it codes like you're 20 years behind. The IDE is junk, the tooling is garbage, the slightest version shift breaks compatibility, the library conflicts with same names of objects, etc...

Qt is my new practical joke for engineers complaining about how bad they have it in their current stack.

Linux really needs a better UI framework because all other platforms are better and faster to implement in native languages/apis.

[Kelteseth]

> It's a massive pain in the ass to use

I use it every day. No more pain than any other UI framework

> the licensing is expensive

Use LGPL if your platform allows it

> convoluted

Yes. The Qt company wants you to pay for their commercial license.

> and it codes like you're 20 years behind

With QWidgets yes. QML is the reason I would not want to start a new app in JS/Electron

> The IDE is junk

QtCreator is easily the best c++ in town.

> The slightest version shift breaks compatibility

Never had any problem the last 4 years with my projects upgrading from 5.8 -> 5.15 [1]

https://gitlab.com/kelteseth/ScreenPlay

[pjmlp]

> QtCreator is easily the best c++ in town.

Actually I would assert that belongs to C++ Builder, with its RAD tooling.

[dkersten]

C++ Builder costs €1500 for the first year though and the community edition limits you to no more than €5k revenue, while Qt Creator is completely free and open source. So I don’t really see them in the same category, personally.

[pjmlp]

The point is what the tooling is capable of, price not being a factor.

Luckily there are places where employers still see a value paying for tooling.