www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - What keeps you from using gtkd or dlangui

reply karabuta <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
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.
Oct 04 2015
next sibling parent reply Manu via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On 4 October 2015 at 23:24, karabuta via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> 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.
Qt is the defacto portable standard, including mobile devices. Sadly, there is no substitute, so as far as I'm concerned, D waits for a Qt5 binding.
Oct 04 2015
next sibling parent reply Suliman <evermind live.ru> writes:
Qt is the defacto portable standard
+1 GTK is crap, and dlangui is single-man project, and also look not very native.
Oct 04 2015
parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
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. wx was the best choice for a while but it seems to have gone. Qt was good then lost focus (Nokia's fault) but now is going full steam ahead. Using it from C++ is a real pain. I just wish I could magically create D Qt5 bindings and port all teh C++ code to D=E2=80=A6
 GTK is crap, and dlangui is single-man project, and also look not=20
 very native.
GTK is perfect, definitely not crap. If you are using GNOME or one of the other UI systems founded on GTK. Single person projects can become multi-person projects. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 04 2015
next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
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.
Oct 04 2015
prev sibling parent Jeremy <jeremy quiescent.us> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jack Stouffer <jack jackstouffer.com> writes:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:38:04 UTC, Manu wrote:
 Qt is the defacto portable standard, including mobile devices. 
 Sadly, there is no substitute, so as far as I'm concerned, D 
 waits for a Qt5 binding.
Uninformed opinion: isn't there a C binding for Qt? Why can't you just tie into that?
Oct 04 2015
parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
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.)
Oct 04 2015
parent John Colvin <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
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.
Oct 04 2015
prev sibling parent karabuta <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:38:04 UTC, Manu wrote:
 On 4 October 2015 at 23:24, karabuta via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> 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.
Qt is the defacto portable standard, including mobile devices. Sadly, there is no substitute, so as far as I'm concerned, D waits for a Qt5 binding.
Can someone please tell me what is wrong dlangui? It might not be stable and it mighint u() { int m = 35, bar = 5; bar--; m /= bar; return m; }t have some few bugs, but is it something I can rely on for a windows-linux GUI app. Surely it might get better somehow. Any unfiltered opinion on this? It hurts so bad that tkd does not look convincing.
Oct 06 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:24:23 UTC, karabuta wrote:
 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 don't like gtk as an end user, so I don't use it as a developer either. I've never tried dlangui, it came out after I started writing my own. What irks me about gtk as a user is that I have to install other stuff to use it and then the created windows just tend to be ugly and hard to use. Though, I've avoided it the last couple years for the most part so maybe it has improved... but Firefox and gimp still use that horribly horrible file chooser dialog sooooooo yeah.
Oct 04 2015
next sibling parent reply karabuta <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:41:56 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
 On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:24:23 UTC, karabuta wrote:
 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 don't like gtk as an end user, so I don't use it as a developer either. I've never tried dlangui, it came out after I started writing my own. What irks me about gtk as a user is that I have to install other stuff to use it and then the created windows just tend to be ugly and hard to use. Though, I've avoided it the last couple years for the most part so maybe it has improved... but Firefox and gimp still use that horribly horrible file chooser dialog sooooooo yeah.
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 :)
Oct 04 2015
parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
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!
Oct 04 2015
prev sibling parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 13:41 +0000, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
=20
[=E2=80=A6]
 I don't like gtk as an end user, so I don't use it as a developer=20
 either. I've never tried dlangui, it came out after I started=20
 writing my own.
=20
 What irks me about gtk as a user is that I have to install other=20
 stuff to use it and then the created windows just tend to be ugly=20
 and hard to use. Though, I've avoided it the last couple years=20
 for the most part so maybe it has improved... but Firefox and=20
 gimp still use that horribly horrible file chooser dialog=20
 sooooooo yeah.
GTK is entirely fine and dandy when using GNOME. I suspect you are trying to use it in OSX or Windows. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 04 2015
parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
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.
Oct 04 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 13:24 +0000, karabuta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
 For some time now I have been trying various GUIs options in D. I=20
 came to settle on gtkd and dlangui(stability is not my current=20
 priority).
=20
 In YHO, what keeps you from using any of those fully(mostly)?=20
 Gtkd first,  followed by dlangui.  I need to know what I am=20
 signing up for.
GTK is fine for GNOME based applications. I have a C++/Gtkmm, that I ported to Python/PyQt5, and am now looking to port to D/GtkD. However, I would not choose this for cross-platform. For that I would choose Qt. Sadly I have yet to find a way of using Qt5 with D. 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. As for DLangUI, I have no experience, but Kingsley showed a demo of using it, and IU would like to have a more practical play. Hopefully the next London D Meeting we can enforce doing something with it. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 04 2015
parent reply Zekereth <paul acheronsoft.com> writes:
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.
Oct 04 2015
parent Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
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=20
 out to be more than enough for good cross-platform=20
 applications. I suspect if there was a D/QML binding, this=20
 would be a good place to be.
=20 Have you seen this? https://github.com/filcuc/dqml I haven't had=20 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. =20 --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent bachmeier <no spam.net> writes:
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 couldn't see any way to use it without first learning how it works using a different language (C, Python, etc.). Maybe there exists beginner documentation somewhere but I couldn't find any.
Oct 04 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
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.
Oct 04 2015
next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
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
Oct 04 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Dicebot <public dicebot.lv> writes:
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)
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Sun, 2015-10-04 at 18:28 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
=20
[=E2=80=A6]
 I absolutely, positively cannot stand software that uses GTK for GUIs
 (including Unity and GNOME...not that anybody actually uses GNOME=20
 anymore) regardless of whether I'm running on Windows or Linux. So I=20
 definitely won't write software that uses it either, if I can help
 it.=20
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=20
 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=20
 using native widgets, and I don't like using software that does that.
=20
 I haven't really done GUI stuff in D yet, but if I were, I'd look
 into=20
 DWT or see what shape wxD is in. Too bad we don't have Qt, I hear=20
 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. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 05 2015
next sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
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"?
Oct 05 2015
next sibling parent reply Dicebot <public dicebot.lv> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
parent reply bachmeier <no spam.com> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
next sibling parent reply Dicebot <public dicebot.lv> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
parent bachmeier <no spam.net> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling parent Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, 2015-10-05 at 21:05 +0000, bachmeier via Digitalmars-d wrote:
=20
[=E2=80=A6]
 This was one of the more extreme cases though:
=20
 - GNOME 3 was very different from GNOME 2. It had no appeal to=20
 their existing users.
Because they hadn't tried the new way, they just wanted the old way. I was in that camp.
 - GNOME users were told that GNOME 2 was dead so they had to=20
 "upgrade".
Nothing wrong with that per se, but the GNOME team definitely failed on almost all counts of marketing and customer care.
 - There was little advance warning that it would be so different.
Not entirely true. There was a good 6 months warning.
 These factors combined to make the vast majority of GNOME users=20
 very upset and very vocal. I'm a happy MATE user today but I had=20
 to switch to KDE for a while until that became a realistic option.
Not vast majority by any means. Many very vocal people yes. I now really like GNOME3 and wouldn't want to switch back to GNOME2 or anything remotely like it. I do wish though that the GNOME team would learn better marketing and customer care. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 18:21:55 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 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.
Enough folks hated it that there have been at least two projects started which are forks of gnome (mate and cinnamon), and some distros are now using those as their default, which has reduced gnome's foothold. So, it did tick off a lot of people, but I don't know how many folks actually switched or how many have come back now that gnome 3 has become much more polished. A lot of folks just use what their distro has. Clearly, there are plenty of folks who use gnome 3 now, regardless of how it was received initially, but how many ultimately dropped gnome because of gnome 3 is probably hard to judge. I don't think that there's much question though that gnome 3 helped further fragment the *nix DE communities, because now we have mate and cinnamon added into the mix. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but between that and Unity, gnome is bound to have lost a lot of market share even if they still have a significant number of users - though since the gnome guys aren't exactly in it for the money, that's not necessarily a problem. They'll just keep on trucking, making what they think is the best DE, and those that like it will use it, while those that don't will find an alternative. Personally, I definitely haven't liked what I've seen and heard of gnome 3 and would rather use gnome 2 (much as I hated it), but I'm a diehard KDE guy, so it doesn't really matter all that much to me so long as it doesn't end up affecting KDE in a negative way. - Jonathan M Davis
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, 2015-10-05 at 14:21 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
=20
[=E2=80=A6]
 GNOME3? I'm surprised to hear that. My (perhaps inaccurate)=20
 understanding was that it landed with quite a thud and alienated a
 lot=20
 of its userbase (and even many of it's developers), moreso than the=20
 early days of KDE4 did. And I've never personally known anyone who
 did=20
 use GNOME3 (to my knowledge), so I figured it had become very much
 fringe.
=20
Your understanding is indeed inaccurate. Yes there was a huge kerfuffle when the GNOME2 =E2=86=92 GNOME3 thing happened. Many very vocal people screamed that the GNOME people were a bunch of w###### and all that sort of stuff. Many GNOME2 users abandoned GNOME and rewrote GNOME2. Many people though got over the marketing (and other) stupidity of the GNOME developers, and actually tried the revolutionary GNOME3 and liked it. I know I went to XFCE but couldn't make it work. Then when I actually tried GNOME3 instead of just screaming about the revolution, I found I really liked it. This does not excuse some of the appalling behaviours of the GNOME developers, some of which continue to happen. This is sad.
 [=E2=80=A6]
 Wait, is there a distinction between "wx" and "wxWidgets"?
No, just bad phrasing on my part. And wxWidgets is the old wxWindows. --=20 Russel. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.winder ekiga.n= et 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
Oct 05 2015
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 10/06/2015 02:21 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
 On Mon, 2015-10-05 at 14:21 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
 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.
Your understanding is indeed inaccurate. Yes there was a huge kerfuffle when the GNOME2 → GNOME3 thing happened. Many very vocal people screamed that the GNOME people were a bunch of w###### and all that sort of stuff. Many GNOME2 users abandoned GNOME and rewrote GNOME2. Many people though got over the marketing (and other) stupidity of the GNOME developers, and actually tried the revolutionary GNOME3 and liked it.
Fair enough. Of course that doesn't account for *all* those who were unhappy with GNOME3 (but I know you're not implying it does): My dislike of GNOME3 *is* from after trying it first. Just seemed wacky to me, and I didn't feel much point in bothering to adjust to it, what with all the other alternatives out there. Actually didn't mind GNOME2 *too* much back at the time: My main beefs with GNOME2 were just the overly-padded GTK widgets/rendering and it seemed to be going for more of an OSX experience for my tastes (Plus I never really liked the Nautilus-based file managers: Like Finder, they just make me feel like my hands are tied behind my back).
 I know I went to XFCE but couldn't make it work.
Y'know, I've always had a fair amount of respect for XFCE, but their big problem has always been polish. It's always had a lot of promise and potential, and I still respect it for that. But it's been in strong need of a big heavy dose of polish for a looong time. (Ex: Just try adjusting the taskbar. And then go back and see how slick, intuitive and "just works" MS (go figure!) managed to make taskbar adjusting a full twenty years ago, back in Win95. Even KDE still hasn't managed to match that either, although it's still way ahead of XFCE in that regard).
 This does not excuse some of the appalling behaviours of the GNOME
 developers, some of which continue to happen. This is sad.
Yea, :( They've even lost major developers over some of it, AIUI. It's too bad. Gnome may not be my cup of tea, but its community does deserve better.
 […]
 Wait, is there a distinction between "wx" and "wxWidgets"?
No, just bad phrasing on my part. And wxWidgets is the old wxWindows.
Ahh, ok.
Oct 06 2015
prev sibling parent reply Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Am Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:21:55 -0400
schrieb Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>:

 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.
As of 2015, critical reception is much more positive.[48] Debian, a Linux distribution that had historically used GNOME 2, switched to Xfce when GNOME 3 was released. However, Debian readopted GNOME 3 in time for the release of Debian 8 "Jessie".[49][48] Linus Torvalds, the creator of the Linux kernel, switched back to GNOME 3 in 2013.[48] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME#GNOME_3 Fedora and RHEL also use gnome 3 by default. Gnome 3 was kinda annoying but has improved with every release. If you use the keyboard shortcuts, virtual desktops and some nice extensions it's a nice DE. And with proper icons (numix) it also looks great.
Oct 06 2015
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 10/06/2015 11:33 AM, Johannes Pfau wrote:
 As of 2015, critical reception is much more positive.[48] Debian, a
 Linux distribution that had historically used GNOME 2, switched to Xfce
 when GNOME 3 was released. However, Debian readopted GNOME 3 in time
 for the release of Debian 8 "Jessie".[49][48] Linus Torvalds, the
 creator of the Linux kernel, switched back to GNOME 3 in 2013.[48]
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME#GNOME_3
Wow, I had no idea about any of that. While I doubt I'll be switching (still don't like GTK or Nautilus, and happy enough with KDE), but now I'm curious to take another look, see how it's come along.
 Fedora and RHEL also use gnome 3 by default.

 Gnome 3 was kinda annoying but has improved with every release. If
 you use the keyboard shortcuts, virtual desktops and some nice
 extensions it's a nice DE. And with proper icons (numix) it also looks
 great.
Well that's good to hear. KDE4 went through the same path. After spending time with KDE4, I found it to be it a terrible blunder of an upgrade even after, several point releases in, people were saying it had finally been fixed. It still has some warts that annoy me (and some things I just gave in on), but it's finally won me back from my hiatus with XFCE/LXDE. Looking forward to v5 stabilizing further.
Oct 06 2015
parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 18:40:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Well that's good to hear. KDE4 went through the same path. 
 After spending time with KDE4, I found it to be it a terrible 
 blunder of an upgrade even after, several point releases in, 
 people were saying it had finally been fixed. It still has some 
 warts that annoy me (and some things I just gave in on), but 
 it's finally won me back from my hiatus with XFCE/LXDE. Looking 
 forward to v5 stabilizing further.
IIRC, KDE 4 really became properly usable around 4.2, and of course, around that time, kmail when to hell in a handbasket, because they added that akonadi trash to kdepim and switched to that for kmail's backend. *bleh* kmail has a great UI, but its backend sucks big time, and since AFAIK, they've never acknowledged that it's a horrible design, they're probably never going to fix it... :( Oh, well. On the whole, KDE 4 has been quite solid for quite a long time now, and nothing else even comes close to what I'm looking for. Fortunately, the transition to KDE 5 should be much smoother, because they don't have to redesign all of the guts this time. But still, I'd just as soon not jump on it very quickly. - Jonathan M Davis
Oct 06 2015
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 10/06/2015 02:53 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 18:40:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 Well that's good to hear. KDE4 went through the same path. After
 spending time with KDE4, I found it to be it a terrible blunder of an
 upgrade even after, several point releases in, people were saying it
 had finally been fixed. It still has some warts that annoy me (and
 some things I just gave in on), but it's finally won me back from my
 hiatus with XFCE/LXDE. Looking forward to v5 stabilizing further.
IIRC, KDE 4 really became properly usable around 4.2
?!? It must've been REALLY bad before that! I think I first tried it around v4.4-v4.6-ish and thus became an immediate fan of the TrinityDE project ;) At that point, KDE4 just felt to me very clumsy, unpolished, sluggish and borderline broken.
, and of course,
 around that time, kmail when to hell in a handbasket, because they added
 that akonadi trash to kdepim and switched to that for kmail's backend.
 *bleh*

 kmail has a great UI, but its backend sucks big time, and since AFAIK,
 they've never acknowledged that it's a horrible design, they're probably
 never going to fix it... :(
One of the projects still on my bucket list (and will likely remain there indefinitely, the way things seem to go...) is a desktop GUI mail/ng client. It pains me that I've wound up settling for Thunderbird :( Desktop mail clients pretty much evaporated once everyone jumped on the webmail bandwagons. And now everyone hates email because it's "such a pain", but...uhh...yea...if you're webmailing it, it's no freaking wonder!
 Oh, well. On the whole, KDE 4 has been quite solid for quite a long time
 now, and nothing else even comes close to what I'm looking for.
 Fortunately, the transition to KDE 5 should be much smoother, because
 they don't have to redesign all of the guts this time. But still, I'd
 just as soon not jump on it very quickly.
///ditto to all that ;)
Oct 06 2015
parent Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 19:23:40 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
 On 10/06/2015 02:53 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 18:40:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 wrote:
 Well that's good to hear. KDE4 went through the same path. 
 After
 spending time with KDE4, I found it to be it a terrible 
 blunder of an
 upgrade even after, several point releases in, people were 
 saying it
 had finally been fixed. It still has some warts that annoy me 
 (and
 some things I just gave in on), but it's finally won me back 
 from my
 hiatus with XFCE/LXDE. Looking forward to v5 stabilizing 
 further.
IIRC, KDE 4 really became properly usable around 4.2
?!? It must've been REALLY bad before that! I think I first tried it around v4.4-v4.6-ish and thus became an immediate fan of the TrinityDE project ;) At that point, KDE4 just felt to me very clumsy, unpolished, sluggish and borderline broken.
LOL. Fedora was actually crazy enough to release KDE 4.0.1. I didn't use that on my home computer, but the computers at school did. It's one thing for someone to do it purposefully; it's quite another to release it as the normal version to use with the distro. Now, I _did_ purposefully install it on whatever distro I was using at the time (OpenSuSE IIRC), and it was truly bad. So, I guess that I was a glutton for punishment, but I _definitely_ grabbed ever update as soon as I could. I don't really blame them for releasing it like that, because they were between a rock and a hard place (until they released it, most of the apps wouldn't be updated, and until the apps were updated, it was going to be trash), but for a distro to actually do a release with it was just crazy. I definitely don't remember there being much in the way of problems with 4.4 and later, but I'd also dealt with the insanity of the really early stuff. It probably did need to be released like it was, but only the crazy folks like me who installed it purposefully should have been using it.
 One of the projects still on my bucket list (and will likely 
 remain there indefinitely, the way things seem to go...) is a 
 desktop GUI mail/ng client. It pains me that I've wound up 
 settling for Thunderbird :(
LOL. That's also on my todo list, though the farthest I've gotten is a partially finished library implementing the RFC for the internet message format. I'll probably get back to it after I finish some more stuff for Phobos. But it's going to take a _very_ long time to finish all of the pieces, especially since I'd like to write pretty much all of it in D. :) For now, I actually put up with kmail, but man do I hate akonadi. Worst thing to ever happen to KDE IMHO. How on earth could anyone think that it was a good idea to have a server for each of your e-mail accounts and treat the e-mail application like a client for each of those servers? I bet if someone forked KDE and put a real backend on it, a bunch of folks would jump on the fork. But if I'm going to go to that much work, I'd rather just write my own. - Jonathan M Davis
Oct 06 2015
prev sibling parent Jay Norwood <jayn prismnet.com> writes:
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 16:35:39 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
 As far as I am aware SWT is only used in Eclipse.
Eclipse can be used to create light-weight RCP apps which include SWT. For example, at work we've used swt-xy-graph in some light-weight apps. There is also a light-weight swtchart program that was easy to use. https://code.google.com/p/swt-xy-graph/ http://www.swtchart.org/doc/index.html The D Poseidon IDE app is a nice example of use of an early version of DWT. Very light-weight, and looks a lot like earlier versions of eclipse (3.x'ish). http://www.dsource.org/projects/poseidon The current eclipse IDE gui provides a way to manipulate the window layout by modifying emf models of the IDE.
Oct 09 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent FreeSlave <freeslave93 gmail.com> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Kapps <opantm2+spam gmail.com> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent thedeemon <dlang thedeemon.com> writes:
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.
Oct 05 2015
prev sibling parent reply Gerald <me me.com> writes:
On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 13:24:23 UTC, karabuta wrote:
 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'm working on a search utility using gtkd, it's essentially a GUI for grep. I was using a program called Search Monkey previously but it hasn't seen much development and was pretty buggy, so looking to replace it with something of my own. This is my first experience using D and GTK so I'm a complete newbie. My limited experience with gtkd has been very positive, while the documentation is primarily reference material it's not very difficult to figure out how things work with GTK based on examples from C or pyGTK. I do use Linix and Gnome Shell so I'm fully wedded to the Gnome HIG so no issues for me in terms of using GTK as a toolkit since it's native to my environment. I really like the fact that gtkd appears to be a full binding and supports GTK 3.16 so newer GTK features like headerbar are available. I had considered learning Go for this utility but the lack of a full binding for GTK was a major impediment for me. I had also previously fooled around with Python but didn't like the language very much, the dynamic typing and indentation to delineate blocks are not for me.
Oct 06 2015
parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 13:38:28 UTC, Gerald wrote:
 My limited experience with gtkd has been very positive, while 
 the documentation is primarily reference material it's not very 
 difficult to figure out how things work with GTK based on 
 examples from C or pyGTK. I do use Linix and Gnome Shell so I'm 
 fully wedded to the Gnome HIG so no issues for me in terms of 
 using GTK as a toolkit since it's native to my environment.
A major advantage to D is that you can declare bindings to C libraries such that using them in D is pretty much identical to using them in C. Having more D-like wrappers around such bindings can be really nice, but when you need to know how to use the bindings, all you have to do is look up how you use those functions in C, and you know how to use them in D. The only major hurdle is having the bindings in the first place. But once you have them, there isn't much reason to program in C rather than D. :) - Jonathan M Davis
Oct 06 2015
parent Johannes Pfau <nospam example.com> writes:
Am Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:41:48 +0000
schrieb Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com>:

 On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 13:38:28 UTC, Gerald wrote:
 My limited experience with gtkd has been very positive, while 
 the documentation is primarily reference material it's not very 
 difficult to figure out how things work with GTK based on 
 examples from C or pyGTK. I do use Linix and Gnome Shell so I'm 
 fully wedded to the Gnome HIG so no issues for me in terms of 
 using GTK as a toolkit since it's native to my environment.
A major advantage to D is that you can declare bindings to C libraries such that using them in D is pretty much identical to using them in C. Having more D-like wrappers around such bindings can be really nice, but when you need to know how to use the bindings, all you have to do is look up how you use those functions in C, and you know how to use them in D. The only major hurdle is having the bindings in the first place. But once you have them, there isn't much reason to program in C rather than D. :) - Jonathan M Davis
True, but you wouldn't really want to use the GTK/GLIB C API in D ;-) GTKd is a complete class-based wrapper, although mainly auto-generated.
Oct 06 2015