GTK vs Qt

IMO GTK is freetard crap but used to be good with GTK2 / 3. Now it's getting worse: GTK4 / libadwaita. They constantly overhaul UI between major versions. It depends on a bunch of small no-name libraries.

Qt continues to improve and not break UI. The transition from Qt5 to Qt6 has no visual change. It has a standard Windows-like look-and-feel and is used by major companies on all platforms. It uses C++ instead of reinventing it (GObject.)

I use Qt. There's not really any other option worth using for cross platform shit.

>>105782605 (OP)
Wrong, GTK was never good and QT is not standard C++, I guess they will remove those ugly macros (like Q_OBJECT) in C++23 (in 20 years or something)

GTK is still plain old C which I prefer over C++.

GTK was crap in 3 too and even 2 wasn't that great.
Qt is kind of bloated and overcomplicated for development but it's the best we've got.
If it was something really big and important like a desktop environment I'd just make my own thing.
>>105782676
This, even if you plan on developing the actual app in C++ it's good to have a C base library.

Gtk 2 is ok, past that I won't use either.

>>105782676
i thought gtk3 and gtk4 is c++

>>105782605 (OP)
GTK 4 is actually great and I will redpill you.
>overhaul UI
GNOME moved their crap to libadwaita, so GTK is just generic now and has stable classes for theming. Mint can write GTK 4 themes and they won't break plus GNOME won't touch GTK styles anymore.
>performance
GTK 4 uses Vulkan for rendering. GPU everything, less CPU cycles, faster rendering.
Default widgets have been optimized and rewritten from 0 https://blog.gtk.org/2020/09/05/a-primer-on-gtklistview/
>features
it supports both CSD and SSD (developer chooses), it supports fractional scaling, it supports setting different font rendering settings. Only toolkit that supports WebKit.
>bloat
it's a minimal toolkit, no Qt Websocket widgets and other bs paid widgets (why does a GUI toolkit do websockets?). QtWebEngine is literally an old insecure embeded Chromium, Falkon browser is many versions BEHIND on security.
>support
GTK major versions are kept alive for decades. GTK 3 is still maintained. Qt kills versions between minor releases. OBS depends on deprecated versions because newer ones keep breaking it every time they catch up.
>C
C bindings for every language out there. Nobody likes C++.
>company
Qt is entirely developed by Trolltech. KDE deals with bugs like the volume picker freaking out and krashing and they can't fix it. They reply with "Qt needs to fix it, wait". You are putting all your eggs in one basket.
>but GTK is made by GNOME
GTK is tiny compared to Qt, you can fix shit yourself, C is simple. Ardour, a GTK 2 DAW, maintains its own fork of GTK 2 because it's so easy.

>>105782605 (OP)
I've stuck with GTK3. The tooling (i.e. GLib, GObject, GIR) is extremely good. There are many libraries that integrate nicely with the GLib event loop. There are many language bindings for GTK. I prefer C over C++ so Qt is automatically not an option for me.

>>105782605 (OP)
Is it possible to not use gtk at all? I guess with a simple wm you could ignore most of it, but I think even installing Firefox would require it.

>>105782605 (OP)
GTK4 is better than GTK3.

>>105782867
Not op but I'll admit it. I fucking despise GNOME and think their default style is hideous. But I can't find anything wrong with anything in this post.
I'd still make my own toolkit for a desktop environment though.

>>105782867
The only thing I dislike about GTK4 is that it's only partially supportive of non-composited display servers.
If you open a window on a basic X11 session, you get solid corners to account for the lack of alpha rendering, but as soon as you open a pop-up, you get black borders.
Either support it or don't. This teasing is annoying.

>>105782867
>GNOME won't touch GTK styles anymore.
>>performance
Too bad they will touch GTK icons whenever they get the chance.
The GTK 3 widget demo is broken on the latest upstream versions. You get a mishmash of symbolic and regular icons because some of them are missing from the Adwaita icon package. You can't rely on AdwaitaLegacy either as it doesn't ship symbolic icons for some reason.

>>105783093
you can set your own icon theme anon

qt5 is so shit, it's unreal. qt6 is an absolute GODSEND.

>>105783143
That just compromises actual GNOME apps that are deeply integrated with upstream Adwaita icons and the desktop.
It's weird that they even allow icon theming when stylesheets are locked down.

Also invented by Trolltech

Gtk4 is best it's ever been, you are just a troon

>>105783228
>Gnome Troonkit calling anyone a troon
lmao

>>105783232
Seethe jew

>>105783249
Ebussy isn't even that obnoxious for GNOME standards. He is more than capable of posting intelligent talking points once in a while.
Sebastian Wick is on a whole different level, and even Freedesktop got tired of him and issued a ban.

>>105782642
C++ standards attempt to do everything at compile time, but Qt requires dynamism; thus, macros and MOC are necessary.

>>105782867
I have tried to create plugins UI for ardour in gtk, but It have to be made in GTK2 to work and if new ardour version come using GTK3 my UI will not work...

>>105783249
Kek, based Ebussy.

>>105782605 (OP)
Qt is evil and proprietary. GTK are the good guys and they are FOSS. Now you can shut the fuck up. Oh, and tell the Qt company to buy an ad next time.

>>105782605 (OP)
cuck license

>>105782867
>GTK is tiny compared to Qt
Who's bigger, the qt company or RedHat?
and read this then cry:
>>105782605 (OP)
>The transition from Qt5 to Qt6 has no visual change.

>>105782605 (OP)
While I like Qt more, the fact that it's written in C++ makes it cumbersome to port to other languages whereas GTK has bindings for basically every language under the sun.

>>105782867
We have a RedHat shill!
>it supports both CSD and SSD
no it doesn't fucktard
>Default widgets have been optimized and rewritten from 0
and renamed or deprecated in the process, also in which world does optimizing mean using MORE resources?
>C
Qt now has C bindings, nigger

I could go on. Fuck you redhatnigger, fuck ebussy and fuck gnome.

>>105786081
>no it doesn't fucktard
Nocoder schizo speaking, listen and learn
https://docs.gtk.org/gtk4/method.Window.set_decorated.html
>and renamed or deprecated in the process
depreciation in GTK means "it will work until the next major version" which is not even an idea yet
renaming is necessary when deprecating as ro not break existing uses, again nocoder
>optimizing mean using MORE resources?
Incapable of reading? The blog describes recycling view lists.
>Qt now has C bindings
GTK has a system called introspection which allows automating binding to other languages from C. Qt's C bindings suck ass and cannot be used as an intermediate for binding to other languages. You never used either have you?
>Please trolltech, step on me

>>105786081
>no it doesn't fucktard
NTA but gimp supports both

>>105782605 (OP)
GTK just because of the loicence

>>105782605 (OP)
Maybe both.
Personally on my linux is gnome classic.
In the past a few employments I always encountered qt a never gtk.

>>105786081
Imbecile.

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/blob/main/gdk/wayland/protocol/server-decoration.xml

Anyone use CopperSpice? It's a full blown fork of Qt that removes gay shit like the MOC and relies solely on modern C++ features. It's also freer for u freetards.

>>105787922
>/wayland/protocol/
irrelevant, no use case

>>105782605 (OP)
I like qt but I hate that qt feels kind of bloated and I hate qstring bullshit.

>>105788852

for me it's tcl/tk

>>105786081
>Qt now has C bindings
Sauce?

>>105784131
They will add compile time reflection in C++23.

>>105786081
>Qt now has C bindings, nigger
It doesn't. But you can use QML + C, you can't have proper 1 to 1 API level bindings.

Reminder that GTK5 is removing theming and X11 support.
GTK4EVER

>>105793255
> They will add compile time reflection in C++23
I am willing to bet its implemented in the worst way possible, having hideous syntax whilst being crippled and barely useful