Gtkmm is dying while GTK-rs is thriving

have you seen their api? it's the worst c-library ever writtern

every release is breaking:
ludocode.com/blog/flatpak-is-not-the-future#the-gtk-problem

Integer scaling only gasbage.

kde

>ludocode.com/blog/flatpak-is-not-the-future#the-gtk-problem
APIs change over time, it's called progress. It'd be very concerning if newer API remained the same since that would mean the project has stagnated.

This is not a new thing at all, I wonder why GTK has to listen to these clueless whiners all the time. The Linux kernel ABI breaks in every major release as well, which is why you use DKMS to recompile drivers automatically.

The author of the blog does not understand versioning. Nobody with real world programming experience bumps critical library versioning without doing proper migration testing.

Wayland doesn't have this problem

>GTKs alternative is KDE
Yes that's what I thought of the height of intelligence of an average KRASH DE zealot.

>>What's wrong with GTK
Mostly, the attitudes of the project and developers. They're very user hostile. They don't think twice before shitting all over cross desktop applications, because they think everybody should be using gnome. They shit all over gnome users themselves, because they buy into a very "progressive" school of software design, in which power users have "knows how to use a computer" privilege and novice incompetent computer users, lacking that privilege, should have their needs prioritized. But they fail at even that; they don't actually listen to those users either. Part of the GNOME philosophy is that users don't know what is best for themselves and should be ignored for their own good. They justify this with pithy remarks about Henry Ford and faster horses, but their alternative to talking to users is just pulling dumb opinions out of their own asses then backing up those opinions with shitty social science style "UX" research that is p-hacked to agree with their preformed conclusions. No surprise their UX studies never tell them to prioritize the basics, like I don't know, an icon view in their file picker??

Anyway, the alternative is Qt. It works great, and it actually has industry traction.

>gtkmm
>gtk-rs
>bindings to a C library
C-hads can't stop winning, literally run the entire world.

By the way, it's an open secret that GNOME exists to serve the needs of Red Hat. Namely, it exists to be a "minimum viable" desktop that allows Red Hat to claim they support a desktop environment. GNOME is not meant to be used, GNOME is meant to check a box on a checklist. Virtually all of the GNOME developers at Red Hat do not actually use GNOME on their personal machines at home (or often, even their computers at work.)

Wasted and gross

>Mostly, the attitudes of the project
Not my problem.

> the alternative is Qt
Copyright patented by the Qt company who are slowly moving to proprietary model. KDE is trying to fork off but they don't have enough manpower for maintaining their own patchset for Qt.

Furthermore Qt is closely tied to C++. The only other language that works with Qt is Python but the PyQt community is stagnated as well.

Which explains why no other language is bothered with it. Electron and Flutter already use GTK as their backend. GTK is the Win32 of Linux.

>By the way, it's an open secret that GNOME exists to serve the needs of Red Hat.
Linux is a red hat product. It's one of the largest contributors to the kernel and the userspace. If you don't like it feel free to move to another OS.

>Virtually all of the GNOME developers at Red Hat do not actually use GNOME on their personal machines at home (or often, even their computers at work.)
Furthermore, the interests of these developers are strongly aligned against the interests of actual GNOME users. Actual GNOME users would benefit from better features and more customization. However to GNOME developers who don't use GNOME, there is no upside to adding such features, only the downside of increased maintenance load.

They try to justify their "GNOME way or the highway" attitude with appeals to progressive power-dynamic arguments. But the reality is their anti-feature attitude is entirely self serving.

>Part of the GNOME philosophy is that users don't know what is best for themselves and should be ignored for their own good.
Very microjew/applel way