Gtk to Qt - a strange journey [linux.conf.au 2014]

I think this gets to the core of the problem. The API is out there and open, yet no one (or at least not many people) have decided to try and make a nice GUI client for Linux. Perhaps it's not a problem with Google but more a problem with publishing desktop/GUI software for Linux still being a complete pain in 2015. There's a fantastic talk from Dirk Hohndel last year about how much pain he's gone through creating and publishing a dive logging GUI application for Linux: [this video] If someone like Dirk, who has access to no less than Linus Torvalds himself, has so much trouble creating a modern GUI app on Linux today then how much luck will anyone else have?

> There’s no objective and open evidence that OOP is better than plain procedural programming. Really depends on what is your definition of "OOP" here > Both Smalltalk and Erlang make use of OOP the way it was originally intended by its inventor, Alan Kay. ah, the bad definition of OOP then. Hint : most C apis that look like foo* foo_create(void); int foo_get_bananas(foo*); void foo_print(foo*, int, int); void foo_free(foo**); are OOP, not procedural. They just lack the syntax sugar. > Linus Torvalds is widely known for his open criticism of C++ and OOP. yet he went on doing C++ for user-space code : [this video] > Some might disagree with me, but the truth is that modern OOP has never been properly designed. It never came out of a proper research institution as someone who did a phd in a "proper research institution", that's a completely bullshit criterion. > OOP doesn’t have decades of rigorous scientific research to back it up oh come on [link]

> Really depends on what is your definition of "OOP" here I smell a no-true-scotsman incoming.. >> Both Smalltalk and Erlang make use of OOP the way it was originally intended by its inventor, Alan Kay. > ah, the bad definition of OOP then. Message-based OOP is usually considered to be superior to inheritance by even OOP advocates, and even composition-based OOP by many. I don't see your evidence for "bad definition of OOP". >Hint : most C apis that look like > foo* foo_create(void); > int foo_get_bananas(foo ); > void foo_print(foo , int, int); > void foo_free(foo ); > > are OOP, not procedural. They just lack the syntax sugar. Not every API that uses a struct is OOP. If your foos use inheritance, virtual dispatch etc, then yes it's OOP. But usually it's just something like a struct to store state instead of having globals or multiple parameters even. >> Linus Torvalds is widely known for his open criticism of C++ and OOP. > yet he went on doing C++ for user-space code : [this video] He's a pragmatist first and foremost, and the GUI libraries he uses (Qt) and the programmers that work on GUI code use C++, he said. I doubt he would write his own GUI framework in C++.

> That first link especially is hyperbolic disingenuous bad faith nonsense. … I glanced briefly over the other articles and it seems like they're the same utter drivel… …I've explained at length why, and why their UX choices were justified, before… Yep. There we go. Saying anything about GNOME that isn't adoring praise immediately draws out the victim-playing accusations of bad faith, and refusal to engage with the actual problems. How dare anybody scrutinize the way GNOME developers treat and conduct themselves around other people. Nobody can ask GNOME to listen to them, but everybody else must listen to GNOME. There's genuinely something strange going on with the mindset around the whole project; it's like they've actively weeded out anybody with any functioning empathy, self-awareness, or non-zero neuroplasticity… It's not GNOME that's crazy; it's literally everybody else [1][2][3][4][5][6[][7][8][9][10] that's ever tried to work with GNOME! They must be out to get you. --- 1: Solus/Budgie — See second link above. 2: Linux Mint — [link] [link] > We want to send a strong signal upstream and towards other projects. We cannot and will not support applications which do not support our users and environments. 3: Transmission — [link] (Cited in first link, which you dismissed as "Hyperbolic disingenuous bad faith nonsense".) 4: System76 (as villified by GNOME) — [link] (Mentioned in second link, which again you dismissed as "utterly stupid and wrong" "utter drivel".) 5: SpaceFM