Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › echo "The `uname` Club" (NEW POLL)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

echo "The `uname` Club" (NEW POLL) - Page 110

Poll Results: How long have you been using your current, main installation?

 
  • 24% (50)
    less then a month
  • 23% (47)
    less then six months
  • 14% (30)
    less then a year
  • 24% (49)
    less then three years
  • 13% (27)
    three years+
203 Total Votes  
post #1091 of 4043
It's just personal preference. There's little benefit to either. Some people think QT is easier to use, some thing GTK is easier to use. Some people think QT is faster, some think GTK is faster. So really at the end of the day it's all personal preference.

I personally find GTK to have a smoother feeling, but that doesn't mean it is.
post #1092 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaero252 View Post

I've long thought we should have a central settings daemon for user preferences so all apps can read from that
That would require everyone agreeing on a toolkit and that's never going to happen.
post #1093 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrl1357 View Post

And what for the love of qt? How is it some how better then gtk? The large percentage of the thing I run often don't have qt replacments. Thus even using kde I'd still be using a ton of gtk, yet for the moment the only qt thing i just must have installed is vlc. So going mainly gtk makes sense for me. Plus I'm not the biggest fan of kde in general, so for the %50 of the time I use a distro with a de already installed, it's going to be a gtk one. When I a distro without, such as the arch install I'm setting up, I find that the vast majority of things I install end up being gtk when I don't think about it. When I have tried all qt I find it hard to find programs that do what I want.

So is there any real (performance) differance? Any reason why some people love qt?

also, as above lxapearance is a great tool. Not as good as the mate/gnome2 theme thingy, but it is a good tool.

Personally speaking, I prefer Qt from a programmers perspective. I dislike projects that attempt to implement more advanced object orientated features in C (for instance, gobject), and that's what I find Gtk trying to do. I also just generally like Qt as a toolkit. I do wish C++ had some of the runtime introspection Qt (through MOC) bolts on. But I find it is less of a pain compared to what I see for Gtk.

I also prefer C++ to C, because I find I try to bolt on such features eventually. But I'm still looking for a perfect language, and neither C or C++ does it for me.
post #1094 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

That would require everyone agreeing on a toolkit and that's never going to happen.

Not even a toolkit, just interface with a daemon, have the daemon interface with the different toolkits/storage options for said settings.
I.e. you could have QT or GTK settings, or SQL based settings storage, and then the daemon either detects or is configured to read the settings from your primary choice and pass them out to the applications... You are right though, it would require too much standardization and wide acceptance among developers to ever see the light of day in Linux land.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 D0 4.2ghz HT (1.3625v) Asus R3E 2xGTX 460 (non SLi, no overclock) 6x2gb G.skill @ 6-8-6-24-1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD-VR 300GBx1, 2xWD 1tb,2x60gb Agility Some crappy combo burner... Arch x64 3xDell U2410f rev A02 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
X-Armor U9BL TT Toughpower 1200w (NTB more efficient) Mountain Mods Pinnacle 24 CYO Roccat Kone (R.I.P. A4Tech x7) 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Experience I-1 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 D0 4.2ghz HT (1.3625v) Asus R3E 2xGTX 460 (non SLi, no overclock) 6x2gb G.skill @ 6-8-6-24-1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD-VR 300GBx1, 2xWD 1tb,2x60gb Agility Some crappy combo burner... Arch x64 3xDell U2410f rev A02 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
X-Armor U9BL TT Toughpower 1200w (NTB more efficient) Mountain Mods Pinnacle 24 CYO Roccat Kone (R.I.P. A4Tech x7) 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Experience I-1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1095 of 4043
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaero252 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

That would require everyone agreeing on a toolkit and that's never going to happen.

Not even a toolkit, just interface with a daemon, have the daemon interface with the different toolkits/storage options for said settings.
I.e. you could have QT or GTK settings, or SQL based settings storage, and then the daemon either detects or is configured to read the settings from your primary choice and pass them out to the applications... You are right though, it would require too much standardization and wide acceptance among developers to ever see the light of day in Linux land.

in terms of toolkits, if you like gtk you can always tell qt to mimic gtk, then changing gtk changes everything.
post #1096 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJD View Post

Personally speaking, I prefer Qt from a programmers perspective. I dislike projects that attempt to implement more advanced object orientated features in C (for instance, gobject), and that's what I find Gtk trying to do. I also just generally like Qt as a toolkit. I do wish C++ had some of the runtime introspection Qt (through MOC) bolts on. But I find it is less of a pain compared to what I see for Gtk.

I also prefer C++ to C, because I find I try to bolt on such features eventually. But I'm still looking for a perfect language, and neither C or C++ does it for me.

I also have to agree. The general consensus among developers seems to be that Qt is the superior toolkit. It's certainly is from a cross platform perspective, as there are implementations of Qt on pretty much every platform. I've also found that it tends to produce better integrated native applications across platforms than GTK+. The performance differences between the two are negligible, however. I'd recommend faced between the choice of either to pick Qt.

At the end of the day though, there isn't a huge difference between the two. But Qt is the saner choice, in my opinion.

As far as programming languages go, I haven't found a language that I enjoy more than C++.
Arcadius
(8 items)
 
Cyrillus
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-3570k ASUS P8Z77-V LE MSI Geforce GTX 660 Ti Corsair Vengeance Blue 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Caviar Blue Arch Linux (XFCE) Corsair GS600 Corsair Carbide 300R 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3317U Proprietary HD Graphics 4000 Proprietary 
Hard DriveOSCase
520 Series FreeBSD (GNOME) Zenbook Prime UX31A-DH51 
  hide details  
Reply
Arcadius
(8 items)
 
Cyrillus
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-3570k ASUS P8Z77-V LE MSI Geforce GTX 660 Ti Corsair Vengeance Blue 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
WD Caviar Blue Arch Linux (XFCE) Corsair GS600 Corsair Carbide 300R 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3317U Proprietary HD Graphics 4000 Proprietary 
Hard DriveOSCase
520 Series FreeBSD (GNOME) Zenbook Prime UX31A-DH51 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1097 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Lawnchair View Post

I also have to agree. The general consensus among developers seems to be that Qt is the superior toolkit. It's certainly is from a cross platform perspective, as there are implementations of Qt on pretty much every platform. I've also found that it tends to produce better integrated native applications across platforms than GTK+. The performance differences between the two are negligible, however. I'd recommend faced between the choice of either to pick Qt.

At the end of the day though, there isn't a huge difference between the two. But Qt is the saner choice, in my opinion.

As far as programming languages go, I haven't found a language that I enjoy more than C++.

Z80 Assembler with no expanded instruction sets or rom calls. Best language.


*intense sarcasm*
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 D0 4.2ghz HT (1.3625v) Asus R3E 2xGTX 460 (non SLi, no overclock) 6x2gb G.skill @ 6-8-6-24-1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD-VR 300GBx1, 2xWD 1tb,2x60gb Agility Some crappy combo burner... Arch x64 3xDell U2410f rev A02 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
X-Armor U9BL TT Toughpower 1200w (NTB more efficient) Mountain Mods Pinnacle 24 CYO Roccat Kone (R.I.P. A4Tech x7) 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Experience I-1 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 D0 4.2ghz HT (1.3625v) Asus R3E 2xGTX 460 (non SLi, no overclock) 6x2gb G.skill @ 6-8-6-24-1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD-VR 300GBx1, 2xWD 1tb,2x60gb Agility Some crappy combo burner... Arch x64 3xDell U2410f rev A02 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
X-Armor U9BL TT Toughpower 1200w (NTB more efficient) Mountain Mods Pinnacle 24 CYO Roccat Kone (R.I.P. A4Tech x7) 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Experience I-1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1098 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Lawnchair View Post

I also have to agree. The general consensus among developers seems to be that Qt is the superior toolkit. It's certainly is from a cross platform perspective, as there are implementations of Qt on pretty much every platform. I've also found that it tends to produce better integrated native applications across platforms than GTK+. The performance differences between the two are negligible, however. I'd recommend faced between the choice of either to pick Qt.

At the end of the day though, there isn't a huge difference between the two. But Qt is the saner choice, in my opinion.

As far as programming languages go, I haven't found a language that I enjoy more than C++.

I've being playing with Google's GO. There are a few things bugging me (lack of template like system, lack of some (optional) static type checking, unused variables are fatal errors, etc), but It does have some really nice qualities too (most importantly, a really nice feeling about it, for lack of better a term).
post #1099 of 4043
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJD View Post

I've being playing with Google's GO. There are a few things bugging me (lack of template like system, lack of some (optional) static type checking, unused variables are fatal errors, etc), but It does have some really nice qualities too (most importantly, a really nice feeling about it, for lack of better a term).

+1

I've being coding a lot of Go lately.

While it's not perfect (all errors being fatal errors being the biggie), it does finally address the issues regarding the verboseness of compiled languages.
post #1100 of 4043
I'd like to join.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X2 550 M4N78 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 G. Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorKeyboard
WD Caviar Black 750GB Scythe Mugen 3 Samsung SyncMaster P2370 Razer Lycosa 
PowerCaseMouse
Seasonic M12II Bronze 650W Generic beige server case, on wheels. Mad Catz R.A.T. 5 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X2 550 M4N78 SE NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 G. Skill 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorKeyboard
WD Caviar Black 750GB Scythe Mugen 3 Samsung SyncMaster P2370 Razer Lycosa 
PowerCaseMouse
Seasonic M12II Bronze 650W Generic beige server case, on wheels. Mad Catz R.A.T. 5 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › echo "The `uname` Club" (NEW POLL)