W
Warren Dulnuan
What is the best GUI toolkit for Ruby?
A
Alex Fenton
Warren said:
The one that does all the things you need it to do.
a
T
Tim Hunter
Warren said:
This is pretty much a perma-thread. Try searching for "ruby best gui
toolkit library" in Google.
W
Warren Dulnuan
Tim said:
Perma thread in Google? i found ten needle thread in yahoo.
V
Vladimir Fekete
easy to learn, easy to implement : gtk
less easy to learn and implement : qt
V.
less easy to learn and implement : qt
V.
P
Phlip
Warren said:
The most widespread and popular GUI system is the web and HTML, so the leading
GUI for Ruby is Ruby on Rails. It makes many systems, such as Ajax, so easy that
a Rails project is competitive with desktop GUIs, such as Java or Visual Basic,
in many spaces.
R
Robert Dober
I guess that for somebody asking for a GUI and getting confronted with
Rails might be err frightening at least.
But the Webinterface idea is not a bad one per se. But you could look
at many tools, starting from a very basic WEBrick to Merv, Mongrel and
I am surely forgetting some...
HTH
Robert
--=20
Ne baisse jamais la t=EAte, tu ne verrais plus les =E9toiles.
Robert Dober
M
Marc Heiler
I guess that for somebody asking for a GUI and getting confronted
I somewhat agree but
I completely agree on this. I think the functionality of the www + js +
css
is very similar to the "traditional" GUI world.
To find the "best" traditional GUI toolkit without any further criterias
is just
asking for disagreement.
For me I would answer that I am still looking for it but I am very
happy with ruby-gtk, especially because of the wiki. (For some reason, I
am really lost without documentation, and ruby-qt does not really have a
wiki AFAIK.)
FXRuby has Lyle which is a super + but I think it also has no wiki.
Tk is a bit old IMO now, and wxruby sounds nice in theory but it used to
have a little problems in the past so i gave up quite on it (since
ruby-gtk and ruby-qt work for me already)
What I personally miss most is CSS in the GUI worlds. Especially the
ease of modifying looks in CSS. This sucks in GTK. I really hate that
part ...
CSS with all its minor flaws it may have, really made customizing
trivial (never mind that you can make it complex, but the basic
principle is super easy and works super nice).
I somewhat agree but
I completely agree on this. I think the functionality of the www + js +
css
is very similar to the "traditional" GUI world.
To find the "best" traditional GUI toolkit without any further criterias
is just
asking for disagreement.
For me I would answer that I am still looking for it
but I am veryhappy with ruby-gtk, especially because of the wiki. (For some reason, I
am really lost without documentation, and ruby-qt does not really have a
wiki AFAIK.)
FXRuby has Lyle which is a super + but I think it also has no wiki.
Tk is a bit old IMO now, and wxruby sounds nice in theory but it used to
have a little problems in the past so i gave up quite on it (since
ruby-gtk and ruby-qt work for me already)
What I personally miss most is CSS in the GUI worlds. Especially the
ease of modifying looks in CSS. This sucks in GTK. I really hate that
part ...
CSS with all its minor flaws it may have, really made customizing
trivial (never mind that you can make it complex, but the basic
principle is super easy and works super nice).
J
James Britt
Phlip said:
But the question was about "the best", not widespread or leading. (If
someone asked for the best programming language, would you suggest Java
or C++?)
I lay out a set of criteria for selecting a GUI toolkit for Ruby here:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/j-monkeybars/index.html
Feel free to ignore the second half of the article which is based on my
unassailable argument for using JRuby + Swing.
Part if the articlediscusses the pros and cons of that choice. (Despite my devotion to
Monkeybars, I'm using Ruby's bindings for KDialog for a few of my
desktop helper apps until I see a need for something more than a quick
dialog box.)
I did not include HTML, though. That's a whole other thread, given the
wealth of robust Ruby Web tools. (And most widespread != best, for all
the same reasons why picking the best desktop GUI tool is so subject to
particular needs.)
Asking for the best of anything is a problem because no one agrees on
what "best" means, so specific requirements (platform, licensing, cost
of tools, available widgets, packaging and deployment options, WYSIWYG
editors, etc.) are critical.
While this is something of a permathread, the available options are
constantly changing, so relying on past discussions is sure to leave out
the latest and greatest. It's useful to revisit it from time to time
(unless someone is faithfully maintaining an up-to-date and objective
resource on Ruby GUI choices).
--
James Britt
www.happycamperstudios.com - Wicked Cool Coding
www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
R
rd
Warren said:
If you were so inclined, you could use JRuby and Swing.
S
Stefano Crocco
Alle Saturday 29 November 2008, Marc Heiler ha scritto:
qtruby doesn't have a wiki, but there's a lot of documentation you can use.
It's true that most of it it's written for programming with Qt in C++ and not
in ruby, but I think it should be easy to understand all the same. I may be
wrong here, however: I know C++ and, indeed, I started programming Qt in C++
before switching to ruby, so the documentation wasn't a problem for me.
Here's a list of the documentation availlable for qt(ruby) that I know of:
* http://doc.trolltech.com/4.4/index.html: the official Qt documentation, for
C++. It also contains one tutorial and several examples, many of which are
explained almost line by line. qtruby includes the sources for both the
tutorial and the examples in ruby.
* http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Languages/Ruby: it documents the main
differences between programming with Qt in C++ and in ruby.
Stefano
For me I would answer that I am still looking for it
happy with ruby-gtk, especially because of the wiki. (For some reason, I
am really lost without documentation, and ruby-qt does not really have a
wiki AFAIK.)
qtruby doesn't have a wiki, but there's a lot of documentation you can use.
It's true that most of it it's written for programming with Qt in C++ and not
in ruby, but I think it should be easy to understand all the same. I may be
wrong here, however: I know C++ and, indeed, I started programming Qt in C++
before switching to ruby, so the documentation wasn't a problem for me.
Here's a list of the documentation availlable for qt(ruby) that I know of:
* http://doc.trolltech.com/4.4/index.html: the official Qt documentation, for
C++. It also contains one tutorial and several examples, many of which are
explained almost line by line. qtruby includes the sources for both the
tutorial and the examples in ruby.
* http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Languages/Ruby: it documents the main
differences between programming with Qt in C++ and in ruby.
Stefano
P
Phlip
James said:
That is exactly why I said "widespread and popular", not "best"...
A
Adam Gardner
Warren said:
If you're only targeting OS X, then Cocoa (via RubyCocoa or MacRuby) are
certainly worth a look. The advantages are numerous; the obvious
disadvantage, of course, being that you can't use any of it on Windows
or Linux.
I haven't used any of the other GUI toolkits, so I can't really comment
on them.
L
Louis-Philippe
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]
For small apps: Shoeseven simpler than web app + cross platform
For small apps: Shoeseven simpler than web app + cross platform
P
Phlip
Adam said:
That's far from "obvious" - plenty of toolkits port easily!
However, one Brian Marick is popping a new RubyCocoa book soon, so I likes!
D
David Dennis
Phlip said:
Um...Aptana? Duh...?
D
David Palacio
It's also kind of onerous in terms of licensing, unless you just *really*
http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=181&release_id=23283
Why no Windows development? There is a gem for it.
http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=181&release_id=23283
K
Kenneth McDonald
I've always thought Tk has been vastly underrated. It's worth it for
the text and canvas widgets alone.
Ken
the text and canvas widgets alone.
Ken
J
Joel VanderWerf
Kenneth said:
Agree. Every time I investigate the alternatives, tk is the quickest
path to 2d animations.
L
Louis-Philippe
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]
you guys should really look at shoes if you want 2D!
I totally agree with you with you that tk is really underestimated,
but it always felt alien to me, because of its syntax roots in TCL which is
a very weird beast.
On the opposite, shoes totally emerge from the ruby culture, if you like
ruby, you'll like shoes.
you guys should really look at shoes if you want 2D!
I totally agree with you with you that tk is really underestimated,
but it always felt alien to me, because of its syntax roots in TCL which is
a very weird beast.
On the opposite, shoes totally emerge from the ruby culture, if you like
ruby, you'll like shoes.