> Developing for desktop Linux is still a pain in the ass
GNOME works great if your language has good bindings for it. Qt is a bit more iffy but still usable if you need cross-platform.
> Developing for desktop Linux is still a pain in the ass
GNOME works great if your language has good bindings for it. Qt is a bit more iffy but still usable if you need cross-platform.
I would argue that it’s heavily in the other direction, having developed fairly extensively in both.
The QT Linux ecosystem is far more cohesive and consistent and QT apps work more seamlessly between KDE, Windows, and MacOS. In my opinion, at least.
Agreed. Qt, for all it's flaws, focused on cross platform. Despite getting sold/resold nearly to oblivion, it had a commercial end (some paying customers), and so it received a level of polish that gtk just never did.
Not to mention, when the gtk3 devs went off the deepend, completely broke backwards compat so they could try some new UI...and you couldn't consistently run gtk on Linux...
I wish there was a good Rust binding for classic Qt...
It only having first class bindings for C++ and Python is a problem for a lot of folks, though. Plenty don’t want to write either.