
Python and Qt: 3,000 hours of developer insight - jseliger
https://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/11/15/python-qt-3000-hours-developer-insight/
======
_red
Its crazy to me how much more difficult its become to "whip up a quick GUI".

Back in the 90s, using fairly lackluster tools like Visual Basic / FoxPro /
Delphi, you could design and create a basic GUI a few minutes. No one needed
to install 2GB of dependencies to either create no run these programs.

Now, just getting an IDE setup to handle creating a "quick GUI" is a mission.
I'm at a loss at why technology moved so backwards with regard to something as
essential as this...

~~~
meredydd
The short answer is, "the Web happened". The Web platform is a stack of
approximately five[1] different programming languages
(SQL/Python/Javascript/HTML/CSS). Each layer generates source code for an
adjacent one, creating a level of cascading complexity which makes it
impossible to create a workable a WYSIWYG GUI editor like (eg) Delphi's.

We cut the Gordian knot in Anvil ([https://anvil.works](https://anvil.works))
by replacing pretty much everything in that stack with one language (Python).
You need to get rid of that complexity if you want to get anywhere close
something like Delphi.

Anvil got pretty well reviewed on HN a few months back:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15584124](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15584124)

\--

[1] - You can quibble about the exact number of languages, but they all have
syntax and they all have source code you need to edit and run to see a result.
And a successful injection into any of them is usually game over.

~~~
jimnotgym
I like Anvil, but the use case is different.

I sometimes have to write little enterprise apps to do little things around an
ERP What I want is to do that little thing and build it into an installer that
my IT team can just install.

~~~
meredydd
Honestly, if you're looking for a local (Windows) executable, those old 90s
tools (VB, Delphi, Xojo [aka RealBasic], even C#) are still great! They're
just as good as they were in the 90s; it's just that demand has moved to the
web (or mobile).

If what you want is a 90s-shaped experience (installable desktop app), then
the best of 90s-era dev tools still kick ass. (It's sad that open source stuff
hasn't caught up, but that's mostly because everyone's been focused on...the
web.)

~~~
mlevental
what's the best cross-platform solution of that bunch?

~~~
fredsanford
Lazarus is very similar to Delphi and is Open Source (L/GPL)

If you're looking for the '90s GUI experience, you likely cannot find better.
It works on Windows, Linux and Mac and possibly the BSDs.

[https://www.lazarus-ide.org/](https://www.lazarus-ide.org/)

~~~
jimnotgym
Just imagine a Lazarus but for Python. It would be the worlds most popular
application.

~~~
Data_Junkie
Boa-Constructor. We had that years ago but it never got popular for whatever
reason, at the time it seemed spectacular. Think it's in the Debian
repository.

[http://boa-constructor.sourceforge.net](http://boa-
constructor.sourceforge.net)

~~~
jimnotgym
Thanks for that, I found some later work on bitbucket. I would love to
understand what held this back from success.

I suppose no-one would take it seriously now unless it used Qt.

[https://bitbucket.org/cwt/boa-
constructor/overview](https://bitbucket.org/cwt/boa-constructor/overview)

------
Barrin92
>Once you’ve written an application with Python and Qt, you want to bring it
into the hands of your users. This turns out to be surprisingly hard.

The biggest hurdle for me personally. I really wish the Python ecosystem would
get a single, officially supported packaging toolchain that is as simple as
the `go guild`in Go.

------
gph1234
I am interested to have the auto update feature so I clicked the link of
Omaha. I felt dizzy that it’s so complicated that the author (of the article,
not of Omaha) is charging monthly subscription fee for helping you do it. No
thank you, I’ll just check my remote URL and replace my exe.

