SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [SLUG] Linux UI decision
- To: Michael Lake <Mike.Lake@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [SLUG] Linux UI decision
- From: Adam Kennedy <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 10:16:21 +1100
- Cc: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (Windows/20061025)
Michael Lake wrote:
2. I have begun development using Qt, as my X/Motif/Tk book is about
a decade old - there are so many IDE's, does anyone think this
environment has a future in the workplace?
As a user I'm finding much of the open source GUI stuff that I download
and have to compile is written with wxWindows. I suspect that that is
because many open source programmers dont have the full, pay for Qt
libraries to develop with. wxWindows has bindings for Python, Perl and
C++. It's web page http://www.wxwindows.org now seems to redirect to
Using wxWindows your one app will work on Linux, MacOSX and Windows.
You can add to that the fact that the bindings for Qt aren't what they
used to be. The Perl bindings for Qt3 were ok, and then they went and
replaced it with Qt4 and I think the maintainers of Qt3 bindings
couldn't be bothered throwing away all their work and starting again.
So on Perl at least, Qt is now not used at all.
In comparison, WxWindows not only works and has good bindings, but
WxWindows is completely integrated into CPAN. So you don't even need to
install it seperately.
You can just install the app, like say the sample Wx application...
(which is Windows Notepad reimplemented in Perl/Wx)
> cpan App::GUI::Notepad
And everything should Just Work.
With Qt that would be been a lot harder, or at least require more work
regarding redistribution (but I'm not sure on that point).
And then there's the fact that you won't be able to use it commercial
All in all it just seems to add up to people being drawn to Wx more,
unless you are doing something in the mobile space, in which case Qt has
done a ton of work on Qt for mobile devices.