GUI

Why can't laying out a GUI (e.g. QT) be as simple as the markup script for a webpage?

Other urls found in this thread:

msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc295302.aspx
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It is, see Microsoft's XAML for WPF/.Net 3.5+

msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc295302.aspx

Or webkit gtk

There's QML for QT. That's simpler than HTML and CSS. And HTML and CSS for layout are only superficially simple; there's a lot of complexity that's accumulated over the years.

absolutely botnet

XUL is XML for GUIs
There is also Android's XML-based layouts or iOS's feature that uses PNGs or whatever to build interfaces

It's pretty easy with Tk. I never even needed a GUI designer. There's bindings for most languages, but Tcl/Tk is the reference and probably has the least bugs.

...

Search for QML, it is basically HTML/JS/CSS for Qt.

Our one decent chance to move ahead... I am deeply sad that HTML persists to this day.

underrated GUI toolkit

...

qt designer>???

There's Qt Designer which allows you to build a graphical layout and SUPPOSEDLY export to python.
I've tried it, it didn't work for some reason, ended up having to change a lot of shit in the exported code so my python script would run.

but it's literally 1000x easier to design a real GUI than to muck with CSS and try to make it work on whatever 40 browser-version combos are trendy today

WPF mate

I think you gave me the best idea for the cancer web of the future.
We should render pages to png using a js renderer and display that picture in the browser. In consequence there's one renderer from now on, and the interoperability problem is solved.

It's exactly as easy if you use electron, please don't though, it's utter garbage.

That's no good either, because it wouldn't look native on the end users system.

Do you even Python?

Anything contributed to opensource written in JS or Python is of negative value. They spread inane language design which brings language development backwards by 20 years.

And anything contributed to opensource written in C brings language development backwards by around 40 years, but people rarely complain about that one. :^)

C and C++ are what they are but they are a necessary evil.
My most respectable CS prof of compilation is very opposed to C++, yet even he is able to admit that, and he absolutely recognizes Stroustrup as a genius.
Python, PHP and the like have zero purpose to motivate their existence.

Please tell me how you do effective string manipulation in C. Last I knew, you need to do a fuckton of buffer allocations and inane snprintfs. High level languages make shit like that easy. This is why you never see a website written in, say, C or C++. Yes, I know Facebook is written in C++, but they absolutely need that speed and they have a tremendous amount of developer resources. I'm a big advocate of C and I say C is not good for many things.

Did I say C was an adequate choice for any purpose, or challenged the need for high level languages? No, I didn't.
Python and friends are subpar languages because they belong in the heritage of the Self language. These languages have the worst properties, from the view of either programmers or machines.
There are sound alternatives, even dynamically typed, such as Smalltalk and Lisp, which we may call class languages. (although Python and other languages often hijack and abuse the term)

Electron is bloat incarnate, but what about shit like Sciter?

In windows you compile a RC script into the exe

However this all then needs to be mapped to code using the windows message queue