I'm developing my first Windows desktop application and I'm trying to figure out what the best approach would be to create the program's GUI.
I know, I know... I feel stupid for asking considering the amount of data on the subject on SO. However most answers seem outdated and I'm not sure if they fit my specific project. Also tutorials for Windows 8 'metro apps' are clogging my Google search results, which is NOT what I'm looking for.
I use Visual Studio. I've followed tutorials. I have basic knowledge of C and Java and extensive experience with PHP. I'm excited to learn C++, so I'm not looking for GUIs to create a GUI (like WinForms). I also don't care about managed code and portability for now, especially since I'm trying to avoid dependencies (i.e. users having to install .NET). As long as it runs smoothly on Vista and up, I'm happy.
The application
The software will teach basic physics to kids. I'd like to create a main area and a sidebar. The main area will feature a physics animation, say a bouncing ball, along with some Q&A. Users can zoom in to the animation to measure some stuff and answer the question. Users can track their progress in the sidebar. That's pretty much it.
What I've found so far
I'm getting a bit frustrated with MSDN. Most of their examples are given in four different languages (C#, C++, etc). I can't seem to get more than a bit of Hello World code from them.
I found a GDI API on MSDN and it seems like a good start for me. However I've read quite a few answers on SO saying creating layouts in pure C++ is really hard, that we're better of using frameworks like ATL and WTL. Since I'm also going to create (somewhat interactive) animations, I've wondered whether I should use gaming-targeted APIs like Direct2D.
Since all of this is new to me, and there are a lot of options, I don't know where to start for my particular application. Any tips would be greatly appreciated!
Using the raw Win32 API (no additional downloads or third-party helpers):
Here's a good primer (introduces dialog boxes, text boxes, buttons, etc): theForger's Win32 API Tutorial
And here's where you go from there (numeric up-downs, list boxes, combo boxes, tooltips, and more): Common Controls on MSDN. Most of these require you to #include <commctrl.h>.
I also found this to be a good resource that covered what the other two didn't: Win32 Developer - Window Assets
But the Win32 API doesn't seem like it does exactly what you want. A physics app for kids should have a more visual GUI than the API can provide. Good luck, though!
If you're ok with adding additional Frameworks, I'd suggest looking at Qt.
It allows to create the GUI from code only, has a good structure, and has an Interface for 2D drawing, if required.
If you are concerned about dependencies, you only have to include the Qt DLLs to your executables; no installation is required for the user.
To get started, see my (old) tutorial "Lessons in Windows API Programming".
But you really need a good book, such as edition 5 or earlier of Charles Petzold's classic "Programming Windows".
The problem with latest edition is that it's for C# and .NET, with Charles grabbing the tail of the "new way" at just the wrong time…
Disclaimer: I haven't checked the details of edition numbers.
Using the Windows API is the simplest, but producing advanced GUIs can take a very long time. Microsoft Foundation Class is a way to make the Windows API more user friendly and OOP. Does anyone have any experience with MFC?
Why not use some 2D C++ game engine, like HGE: http://hge.relishgames.com/overview.html.
Is it a good idea to use gtkmm gui toolkit for some desktop client application ?
Is this toolkit stable and is there enough documentation online ?
I used gtkmm to write professional applications and yes you can use it for real world software development.
But I also used C/GTK+ and C++/Qt and my opinion is that using Gtkmm you have the feeling that the original toolkit was meant to be used in C and the porting to C++ is ok but in many cases you feel that C++ features could have been used better.
For Comparison:
If you have to choose between Gtk and Gtkmm go for Gtkmm even though you might find yourself stuck in some not well documented or supported function. Eventually you always manage to find a solution (you can check the source code) and c++ is way better then c.
If you have to choose between Gtkmm and Qt, go for Qt. There is a HUGE gap between the two. Not only in the toolkit itself but in the documentation and all the other classes that you need when writing an application.
I started two month ago with gtkmm. I actually port a tcl/tk application and it feels very hard for my to get the things run. The only useful documentation I found is the https://developer.gnome.org/gtkmm-tutorial/3.4/
But many things described in the manual are not working! I actually run into trouble while overriding signal handlers which should work but didn't. Maybe you will take a look in gtkmm-list#gnome.org to find out what kind of problems yo will maybe run in :-)
The docs derived from the doxygen input seems useless for me, because the functions are mostly not described and the parameter names or often not very clear to me.
In comparison to tcl/tk the interface looks inconsistent. Sometimes a parameter must be provided by a text, sometimes by a pointer and sometimes by the native value itself. Especially the menus are very "mysterious" with the string based configuration. The need of having parameters as text is very unhandy! You have to convert the parameter with ostrstream into a text and parse the parameters sometimes yourself from text to real values.
I decided to give gtk+ a chance is the existence of the c++ interface. I thought it would be helpful to get the errors in compile time and not while running the app like with tcl/tk. But this is not the always true with gtkmm. With gtkmm you are also able to run into run time errors because all string parameters will be parsed during run time! This makes the things error prone!
Maybe I will start again and give Qt a chance. But a first view on it shows, that this seems not really better :-)
Writing a gui application still is a really annoying job!
gtkmm is a official supported binding of GTK (gtk.org/language-bindings.php).
"inkscape" and "ardour" are notable applications written in gtkmm
The bindings that are official GNOME Bindings follow the GNOME release schedule which guarantees API stability and time-based releases.
If you want to write your Application in C, go with GTK+ (and the GLib).
You can find a link to the documentation at http://www.gtkmm.org/ (https://developer.gnome.org/gtkmm-tutorial/).
With Glade (and ie. PyGTK) you could rapid prototype your application.
Building a GUI with Glade is easy and the resulting UI is a xml file, that is not bound to a programming language.
I'm wondering how to develop visually modern, with attractive GUI applications in QT. When I run QT Creator and start new project, the GUI looks very basic and "pure", just like simple win32 apps. But look for example at Allegorithmic Substance Designer 2, where GUI looks somehow similar to WPF. There are many other applications with nice-looking GUI. So, the question is: how to do this? Is there any extension/library to QT, which provide richer GUI experience? Or it must be developed from scratch? Thanks for replies in advance.
As well as Nano's answer, I think it would be worth your while to search around for any Qt stylesheets others have made.
For example, this one that mimics Microsoft Office.
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be very many of them available.
I found these useful links, some of whose links may give some ideas:
Qt Stylesheet Snippet Repository
Another idea might be to search for example qml files in Google Code Search. This search for .qml files has plenty of hits. Before using any of them, you would obviously need to check its license.
Have you tried Nokia's Qt Creator? If you're looking for something "similar" to WPF I assume you're referring to its declarative nature, QML being XAML's counterpart in such regard.
I am trying to create some charts of data (eg http://www.amibroker.com/). Is there a C++ library that can do this without a lot of extra work? I'm thinking Qt or wxWindows would have something like it, but it wasn't immediately obvious.
Thanks!
FLTK is a light and portable C++ toolkit for GUI. There's a chart class. Sample.
Qwt does at least some of the things you are trying to achieve (basic plots, bar charts and so on), and integrates well with Qt.
I think you need to pick your GUI framework first, then find a charting control for the given framework, since that affects what charting controls you could feasibly use. For example, must this be portable?
For the project I'm working on (a large MFC application) we use Cedric Moonen's ChartCtrl. We've had a pretty good experience with it so far.
I've done some graph plotting with gnuplot lately, which is quite powerful. Although I think it is Linux only, which may or may not be a problem.
Also, believe it or not, some amazing things can be done with LaTeX. I've used the tkz (tikz) library to produce some awesome graphs.
Both solutions plot to a file which you can include in your interface.
They aren't C++ libraries but you can easily create the datafiles and call the necessary programs from within your C++ program (Being creative with system() and possible some shell scripts).
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm spending these holidays learning to write Qt applications. I was reading about Qt Designer just a few hours ago, which made me wonder : what do people writing real world applications in Qt use to design their GUIs? In fact, how do people design GUIs in general?
I, for one, found that writing the code by hand was conceptually simpler than using Qt Designer, although for complex GUIs Designer might make sense. Large GUIs might be possible using Designer, but with time they might become very difficult to manage as complexity increases (this is just my opinion). I also downloaded the AmaroK source code to take a peek at what those guys were doing, and found many calls to addWidget() and friends, but none of those XML files created by Designer (aside: AmaroK has to be my favorite application ever on any platform).
What, then, is the "right" way to create a GUI? Designer or code? Let us, for this discussion, consider the following types of GUIs :
Simple dialogs that just need to take input, show some result and exit. Let's assume an application that takes a YouTube URL and downloads the video to the user's hard disk. The sort of applications a newbie is likely to start out with.
Intermediate level GUIs like, say, a sticky notes editor with a few toolbar/menu items. Let's take xPad for example (http://getxpad.com/). I'd say most applications falling in the category of "utilities".
Very complex GUIs, like AmaroK or OpenOffice. You know 'em when you see 'em because they make your eyes bleed.
Our experience with Designer started in Qt3.
Qt3
At that point, Designer was useful mainly to generate code that you would then compile into your application. We started using for that purpose but with all generated code, once you edit it, you can no longer go back and regenerate it without losing your edits. We ended up just taking the generated code and doing everything by hand henceforth.
Qt4
Qt4 has improved on Designer significantly. No longer does it only generate code, but you can dynamically load in your Designer files (in xml) and dynamically connect them to the running objects in your program -- no generated code however, you do have to name the items in Designer and stick with the names to not break your code.
My assessment is that it's nowhere near as useful as Interface Builder on Mac OS X, but at this point, I could see using the Designer files directly in a program.
We haven't moved back to Designer since Qt3, but still use it to prototype, and debug layouts.
For your problems:
You could probably get away with using the standard dialogs that Qt offers.
QInputDialog or if you subclass QDialog, make sure to use QButtonDialogBox
to make sure your buttons have the proper platform-layout.
You could probably do something more limited like xPad with limited Designer functionality.
I wouldn't think you could write something like OpenOffice solely with Designer but maybe that's not the point.
I'd use Designer as another tool, just like your text editor. Once you find the limitations, try a different tool for that new problem. I totally agree with Steve S that one advantage of Designer is that someone else who's not a programmer can do the layout.
In my experience with Qt Designer and other toolkits/UI-tools:
UI tools speed up the work.
UI tools make it easier to tweak the layout later.
UI tools make it easier/possible for non-programmers to work on the UI design.
Complexity can often be dealt with in a UI tool by breaking the design into multiple UI files. Include small logical groups of components in each file and treat each group as a single widget that is used to build the complete UI. Qt Designer's concept of promoted widgets can help with this.
I haven't found that the scale of the project makes any difference. Your experience may vary.
The files created with UI tools (I guess you could write them by hand if you really wanted to) can often be dynamically loaded at run-time (Qt and GTK+ both provide this feature). This means that you can make layout changes and test them without recompiling.
Ultimately, I think both raw code and UI tools can be effective. It probably depends a lot on the environment, the toolkit/UI-tool, and of course personal preference. I like UI tools because they get me up and running fast and allow easy changes later.
The organisation I work for has ported its GUI application to Qt several years ago.
I think there are several aspects that are worth mentioning:
Working with Qt Designer, at least at that point, was not a realistic option: there were too many features that couldn't be done with Qt Designer;
Conventions and structure that had to be preserved prevented the use of Qt Designer;
Once you've started without Designer, it is probably difficult to return to it;
the most important aspect, though, was that the programmers were very much used to programming using vi or emacs, rather than using a GUI IDE.
My own experience, which goes back approx. 4 years, using Qt3.3, is that dynamic behavior in dialogs was not possible to realise in Designer.
Just to say I've written and maintained complex GUIs in Qt without using Qt Designer -- not because I don't like Qt Designer, but because I never got around to working that way.
It's partly a matter of style and where you're coming from: when I started on Qt, I'd had horrible experiences of Dreamweaver and Frontpage and other visual HTML tools,and far preferred writing code with HomeSite and resorting to Photoshop for tricky layout problems.
There's a danger with visual code IDEs that you try to keep within the visual tools, but end up having to tweak code as well -- in ways that aren't well understood.
Learning iPhone development, for example, I've found it frustrating to hit 'magic' visual stuff ('drag from the empty circle in the Connections inspector to the object in the Interface Builder window...') that would be simpler (for me) to understand in plain old code.
Good luck with Qt -- it's a great toolkit, however you use it, and Qt Creator looks like being a great IDE.
I'd add that one of the reasons for using graphical designer was the lack of layout managers in Win32, for instance. Only absolute positioning was possible, and doing that by hand would have just sucked.
Since I switched from Delphi to Java for GUI apps (back in 2002), I've never used designers any more. I like layout managers much more. And yeah, you get boilerplate code, but moving objects on a UI designer may take as much time as changing the boilerplate. Plus, I would be stuck with a slow IDE; that's for the Java/C# case, OK, while for Qt (especially Qt4) it doesn't apply. For Qt3, I wonder why one should edit the generated code - wasn't it possible to add code in other files? For which reason?
About the discussed cases:
1) Hand Coded GUI is likely faster to write, at least if you know your libraries. If you're a newbie and you don't know them, you may save time and learn less with a designer, since you don't need to learn the APIs you use. But "learn less" is the key factor, so in both cases I'd say Hand Coded GUI.
2) Menu bars are quite annoying to write code for. Also, think to details like accelerators and so on. Still, it depends on what you're used to. After some time, it may be faster to type that boilerplate than to point-and-click into designer to fix all those properties, but just if you can really type like into a typewriter (like those admins for which typing Unix commands is faster than using any GUI).
3) I'd extend the answer for case #2 to this one. Note that, for Win32 platforms, it may be possible that using designers which generate Win32 resources might be faster to load (no idea about that).
However, I'd like to mention a potential problem with using Qt Designer there. Real world case: it took some seconds (say 10) to load a complex Java dialog (the Preferences dialog box for a programmer's text editor) with a lot of options. The correct fix would have been to load each of the tabs only when the programmer wanted to see them (I realized that after), by adding a separate method to each preference set to build its GUI.
If you design all the tabs and the tab switcher together with a designer, can you do that as easily? I guess there might be a similar example where a hand coded GUI gives you more flexibility, and in such a big app, you're likely to need that, even if just for optimization purposes.
One of the main benefits of using designer to create GUIs is that other programmers can change or maintain forms and widgets easily without the need to delve in to a complex code.
Its strange that you're saying the writing code is simpler than manipulating objects in a graphical environment. It's a no-brainer.
The designer is there to make your life easier and in the long term it makes your code more maintainable. It's easier looking in the designer to see what the your UI looks like then reading the code and trying to imagine what it might look like.
With current Qt you can do almost everything from within the designer and the very few things you can't do, you can fix with very few lines of code in the constructor.
Take for instance the simplest example - adding a signal-slot connection. Using the designer it's as simple as a double click. Without the designer you need to go lookup the correct signature of the signal, edit the .h file and then edit write your code in the .cpp file. The designer allows you to be above these details and focus on what really matters - the functionality of your application.
I like to first turn to the designer to develop GUI widgets. As mentioned in the other posts, its faster. You also get immediate feedback to see if it "looks right" and isn't confusing to the user. The designer is a major reason I choose Qt over other toolkits.
I mostly use the designer to make the one-off dialogs.
Having said that, I do the main window and any complex widgets by hand.
I think this is the way Trolltech intended. QFormLayout is a class they provide to easily programatically create an input dialog.
By the way, the designer in Qt 4 is not an IDE like the one they had in Qt 3. It's just an editor for editing .ui files. I like it that way. The new cross platform IDE is going to be called Qt Creator.
It's an old post but I would advise you to look at Clementine - a music player which (I think) derives from Amarok. They use Qt4 and from what I can see there is a ui folder in the src folder of the project. In the ui folder as one might expect they have all sorts of .ui files. If you compile and start Clementine you will see that the GUI is fairly complex and quite nice.
For me, it depends how much logic is encapsulated in the widget/GUI. If it's just about simple forms, I prefer to use QtDesigner.
If it contains complex checks or interaction, I tend to program it.
We're using the Qt Designer if anyone needs to create a Gui.
The thing is to create just little Widgets for certain tasks (like you would do in a class-design) and then get them together into a "parent-gui".
This way your widgets are highly reusable and could be used for Guis in a modular way. You just have to specify which signals each Widget is sending and which slots they provide.
We additionally are creating .ui-Files which than could be generated during build-process. Until now there was no need to edit those files by hand.
Build different parts of your UI
in different .ui files using QtDesigner,
then bring them together (and add complications) in code.
There are things you can't do in Qt Designer, you can only do in code,
so Qt Designer is just one (great) part of the tool chain.