On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 14:50:10 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> GTK is entirely fine and dandy when using GNOME.

I don't like GNOME either.

> I suspect you are trying to use it in OSX or Windows.

Well, I myself am on Linux on the desktop, but yeah, I do sometimes use my programs on my Windows laptop or distribute them to other people, so it is nice if the library doesn't suck on them too.

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 14:49:18 UTC, karabuta wrote:
> By the way, I can draw icons. Tell me when you need icons for minigui. At least, I can drawn better than those used in gtk :)

Cool, though I'm trying to use native ones wherever I can both to get the native look and the keep the size of minigui down (I'd have to have to change its name to "bloatedgui.d"!)

But for my X11 one, I'm doing my own widgets so I might do my own icons too. We'd get to embed them in the source! Fun fun!

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 14:48:11 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> Uninformed opinion: isn't there a C binding for Qt?

No, it is a pure C++ lib.

D's C++ interop is getting to the point where it is good enough to get started with Qt though, but Qt is also a big library with a lot of other meta stuff around it too. (They built their own reflection compiler on.... at least the old version .... which D can do, but it would need to be reimplemented. And of course, it is just a lot of work to write the bindings, even using a native interface. Qt is a big library. I haven't used Qt5 though, I only used Qt4.)

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 15:19:21 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 14:48:11 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
>> Uninformed opinion: isn't there a C binding for Qt?
>
> No, it is a pure C++ lib.
>
> D's C++ interop is getting to the point where it is good enough to get started with Qt though, but Qt is also a big library with a lot of other meta stuff around it too. (They built their own reflection compiler on.... at least the old version .... which D can do, but it would need to be reimplemented. And of course, it is just a lot of work to write the bindings, even using a native interface. Qt is a big library. I haven't used Qt5 though, I only used Qt4.)

I would be very tempted to build a D-friendly wrapper, in C++, around the nastier bits.

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 14:48:57 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> Go only has QML bindings not a complete Qt5 binding. This turns out to be more than enough for good cross-platform applications. I suspect if there was a D/QML binding, this would be a good place to be.

Have you seen this? https://github.com/filcuc/dqml I haven't had a chance to try it yet though.

On 10/04/2015 09:24 AM, karabuta wrote:
> For some time now I have been trying various GUIs options in D. I came
> to settle on gtkd and dlangui(stability is not my current priority).
>
> In YHO, what keeps you from using any of those fully(mostly)? Gtkd
> first,  followed by dlangui.  I need to know what I am signing up for.

I absolutely, positively cannot stand software that uses GTK for GUIs (including Unity and GNOME...not that anybody actually uses GNOME anymore) regardless of whether I'm running on Windows or Linux. So I definitely won't write software that uses it either, if I can help it. That rules out gtkd. I'm sure it's a fine set of bindings, but I'm not about to force a GTK UI on any poor end user.

As for dlangui, the stuff about OpenGL makes it sound like it's not using native widgets, and I don't like using software that does that.

I haven't really done GUI stuff in D yet, but if I were, I'd look into DWT or see what shape wxD is in. Too bad we don't have Qt, I hear nothing but good things about it.

On 10/04/2015 10:53 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 14:16 +0000, Suliman via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
>> GTK is crap, and dlangui is single-man project, and also look not
>> very native.
>
> GTK is perfect, definitely not crap. If you are using GNOME or one of
> the other UI systems founded on GTK.
>

I've used Unity, GNOME3. GNOME2, Mate, and Cinnamon. They all made me want to tear my hair out (especially the first two), largely *because* of GTK.

But to each him own, of course. FWIW, YMMV, IANAD, BBQ.

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 22:28:59 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I absolutely, positively cannot stand software that uses GTK for GUIs (including Unity and GNOME...not that anybody actually uses GNOME anymore) regardless of whether I'm running on Windows or Linux. So I definitely won't write software that uses it either, if I can help it. That rules out gtkd. I'm sure it's a fine set of bindings, but I'm not about to force a GTK UI on any poor end user.

The same here. I've always thought that gtk was positively hideous. But I've known folks who preferred it, and clearly there are plenty of folks willing to at least put up with it to use Gnome. So clearly, YMMV.

At this point, if I were going to write a GUI app, I'd look at the current state of the various attempts at binding Qt to D and either use one of those if it were far enough along, or I'd just write the GUI portion in C++ and the backend in D. But I'm also a KDE user, so Qt fits in much better with my environment on top of just plain looking better.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 22:28:59 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> (including Unity and GNOME...not that anybody actually uses GNOME anymore)

I can't resist but to post this https://www.archlinux.de/?page=FunStatistics :P

On topic : I don't use gtkd simply because I never do GUI. Otherwise I totally would, hate Qt since C++ days (maybe it got better with Qt5 but not really willing to try)

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:24:23 UTC, karabuta wrote:
> For some time now I have been trying various GUIs options in D. I came to settle on gtkd and dlangui(stability is not my current priority).
>
> In YHO, what keeps you from using any of those fully(mostly)? Gtkd first,  followed by dlangui.  I need to know what I am signing up for.

Is dlangui still alive? The last commit was 5 months ago. Maybe we should ask the author.

What I did not like about dlangui is performance on window resizing. It eats a lot of CPU and make application unresponsive for some time after (tried it on Linux without compositing window manager). Maybe it's because of SDL2.