GTK is horrid on OSX, and I've had performance issues with it.
I was interested in dlangui, it has promise, but I don't really want to rely on a library designed by one person that reinvents everything. It's guaranteed that that one person will want to move on at some point, and I don't want writing a GUI program to include maintaining a GUI library.

On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 14:53:57 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 14:16 +0000, Suliman via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> > Qt is the defacto portable standard
>> +1
>
> I agree that for cross-platform, Qt is increasingly the right choice again.
>

This thread is perfect. I am happy to step into such a vibrant community.

I am starting a desktop GUI application in D, and I am looking at which GUI library will support my application.  My first target is Windows, and dqml looks like the best solution so far. Are other people using dqml? What are the pain points in using it? Thank you.

On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 18:28 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d 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.

Lots of us use GNOME and are proud to do so.

> 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.

Neither am I, but I still like GNOME and hence use GTK. But for portability Qt is where to be.

> 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.

As far as I am aware SWT is only used in Eclipse. Given Qt is used in far more widespread and disparate places, it strikes me as a better choice.

wx has always been interesting, well wxPython was. However that fell into disrepair and the follow on Phoenix never got off the ground. Shame, wx had a lot going for it. wxD appears to be stalled/fallow/in disrepair. Might it be worth picking up? wxWidgets is still going strong, however Qt is where the wave is for cross platform.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 19:29 +0000, Zekereth via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> 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.

Yes, but I haven't had chance to try it out. it is a wrapper around
DOtherSide, which can be used from D or Nim.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On 10/05/2015 12:35 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 18:28 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
> 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.
>
> Lots of us use GNOME and are proud to do so.
>

GNOME3? I'm surprised to hear that. My (perhaps inaccurate) understanding was that it landed with quite a thud and alienated a lot of its userbase (and even many of it's developers), moreso than the early days of KDE4 did. And I've never personally known anyone who did use GNOME3 (to my knowledge), so I figured it had become very much fringe.

> wx has always been interesting, well wxPython was. However that fell
> into disrepair and the follow on Phoenix never got off the ground.
> Shame, wx had a lot going for it. wxD appears to be stalled/fallow/in
> disrepair. Might it be worth picking up? wxWidgets is still going
> strong, however Qt is where the wave is for cross platform.
>

Wait, is there a distinction between "wx" and "wxWidgets"?

On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 18:21:55 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> GNOME3? I'm surprised to hear that. My (perhaps inaccurate) understanding was that it landed with quite a thud and alienated a lot of its userbase (and even many of it's developers), moreso than the early days of KDE4 did. And I've never personally known anyone who did use GNOME3 (to my knowledge), so I figured it had become very much fringe.

As it usually happens, perception can be easily misguided by the fact that most unhappy users tend to also be most vocal - while the satisfied ones simply mind their own business. The link above shows that at least in Arch Linux KDE and GNOME 3 have exactly identical install share.

On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 19:48:58 UTC, Dicebot wrote:

> As it usually happens, perception can be easily misguided by the fact that most unhappy users tend to also be most vocal - while the satisfied ones simply mind their own business. The link above shows that at least in Arch Linux KDE and GNOME 3 have exactly identical install share.

This was one of the more extreme cases though:

- GNOME 3 was very different from GNOME 2. It had no appeal to their existing users.
- GNOME users were told that GNOME 2 was dead so they had to "upgrade".
- There was little advance warning that it would be so different.

These factors combined to make the vast majority of GNOME users very upset and very vocal. I'm a happy MATE user today but I had to switch to KDE for a while until that became a realistic option.

On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 21:05:11 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
> This was one of the more extreme cases though:
>
> - GNOME 3 was very different from GNOME 2. It had no appeal to their existing users.
> - GNOME users were told that GNOME 2 was dead so they had to "upgrade".
> - There was little advance warning that it would be so different.
>
> These factors combined to make the vast majority of GNOME users very upset and very vocal. I'm a happy MATE user today but I had to switch to KDE for a while until that became a realistic option.

Notable portion - yes. Vast majority - not even close. Stats tell that clearly.

On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 21:35:49 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 21:05:11 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
>> This was one of the more extreme cases though:
>>
>> - GNOME 3 was very different from GNOME 2. It had no appeal to their existing users.
>> - GNOME users were told that GNOME 2 was dead so they had to "upgrade".
>> - There was little advance warning that it would be so different.
>>
>> These factors combined to make the vast majority of GNOME users very upset and very vocal. I'm a happy MATE user today but I had to switch to KDE for a while until that became a realistic option.
>
> Notable portion - yes. Vast majority - not even close. Stats tell that clearly.

I've not seen any stats that would inform us on that. For years, GNOME was the dominant desktop, as in 2:1 versus KDE. According to the link you posted above, GNOME usage is even with KDE and barely even ahead of XFCE. I won't put much weight on that though because Arch is not representative.

Some other things to keep in mind: GNOME 3 brought in a lot of new users that didn't like GNOME 2 (I guess most current users didn't use GNOME 2 and wouldn't consider doing so), some existing users hated it but continued to use it anyway, and some hated it initially but later used it once it as it became usable. I'd be shocked if more than 30% of GNOME 2 users were happy with GNOME 3 in the first six months after it was released.

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.

I recently started using DLangUI in several projects, so far I'm quite happy with it. I'm using not the latest version, as I had a funny bug in recent version where all images were upside down (didn't investigate much, just took a version that worked fine before). I'm using it on Windows.

One downside is some things in DLangUI tend to allocate in GC heap more than necessary.