Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rafram 656 days ago
GTK? Qt? They're not exciting, but they sure do work.
2 comments

These are both terrible on macOS and Windows (they look ugly and are hard to build), and very poorly integrated in other languages than C/C++.

Way worse choices in my opinion.

Hard disagree. I can't even tell the difference the majority of the time, and I work with Qt every day (and love it)... probably most other people can't tell either. I never found it hard to build, and as far as other languages go, I have had great success using it from both Python and Swift rather easily. I don't think there are any better choices for a stable and mature framework with anywhere near the feature set.
I don't think COSMIC is gonna be ported to OSX and Windows. In fact you can quote me on that, I'd rate the chances of me being wrong at infinitesimal.
And then it would be just another minimalist desktop environment trying to compete with Gnome.
Well, sure? Is that not what this already is? They could even write their GTK or Qt apps in Rust if they wanted to!
Using a native toolkit built for Rust has massive productivity benefits when writing programs in Rust. Last I checked the GTK bindings for Rust were rough at best, I don't even know if they exist for QT.
The people using the DE don't care what programming language it's written in, so it's absurd to ask users to accept a rough/inferior/buggy/inaccessible system because an experimental UI library was more enjoyable for the developers.
They won't have to accept anything if the developer never writes code in the first place... this is a ridiculous argument. How do you think most open source desktop software gets made?
Then the can just use Gnome ...