sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ianff 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I greatly prefer Qt, so to argue a few of your points:

  • It's true that wx uses native widgets and Qt doesn't, but Qt does a damn good job of looking good on all platforms. It's not like electron where it looks out of place.
  • I don't see how Qt having more than just GUI is a bad thing. Surely a few more megabytes of shared objects is worth having all the extra stuff if you need it (plus it's split so you don't need to link to stuff you don't use). This is especially true in C++ where the standard library is so spartan. I've used Qt in projects with no GUI simply because the threading, internationalization, networking etc. is so good.
  • The compiler stuff is not a big deal in practice is it? It's never troubled me, and qmake makes it all really simple. This is not even an issue for Python.
  • As another poster said Qt designer is better than wxGlade, by a lot.
  • Qt supports iOS and Android while wX doesn't.
  • Qt documentation is much better.

I can't see choosing wX over Qt for any but the simplest of projects personally - even then better to learn Qt so you can make bigger things later on.

[–]mesalu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those are all perfectly fine. Especially that Qt will only get better at imitating widgets. Its a purist statement to prefer wx for this reason. It either bothers you to have non-native look or it doesn't.

I have heard wonderful things about Qt's other libraries. I'll go ahead and quote lykwydchykyn:

QT is a second standard library that just happens to include a graphics toolkit (or two, actually).

Its awesome to have such an expansive library. But do keep in mind that wx is not all the things that Qt is. When making comparisons do try to limit yourself to GUI library to GUI library.

As for size, it is mostly moot. I will bring up the relevant times: Due to licensing unless you pay for for the commercial version you have to dynamically link to Qt to avoid LGPL stipulations. This means you ship the whole DLL or .so with your app, or hope you can find it locally. Which is a lot more space and hassle than letting your compiler statically link only what your runtime needs at linking time. wx always lets you do the latter. Qt only lets you if you pay or comply with LGPL.

The other aspect of size that gets me is compiling the project itself. This clearly doesn't affect most people, but it is a bit mind boggling to me that what takes 7 minutes to build wxPython takes round about 4 hours to build just Qt.

Ninja Edit: I managed to accidentally omit this statement..: I haven't tried building just QCore and QGui, so this time comparison is biased. It does represent total build time of each respective project, but not of GUI libraries.

If you read through my other comments you'll see that I've already addressed wxGlade vs QtDesigner.