Underlying Toolkit [LWN.net]

Underlying Toolkit

Posted Dec 29, 2025 11:35 UTC (Mon) by taladar (subscriber, #68407)
In reply to: Underlying Toolkit by peterhoeg
Parent article: Going boldly into the COSMIC desktop environment

I hope no Rust library will ever feel the need to ship with 27 different kinds of reinvented wheels the way Qt does.

to post comments

Underlying Toolkit

Posted Dec 29, 2025 17:04 UTC (Mon) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link] (2 responses)

That is very very unlikely to happen because the conditions around the creation of the Rust ecosystem and Qt are vastly different. Qt was created in the 90's when code sharing over the Internet was much more primitive and C++ was much newer so the "batteries included" approach was necessary because it was prohibitively complex to scavenge the necessary functionality piecemeal. Today with Rust you have ubiquitous git and Internet, so a tool like cargo to manage the complexity of building software using multiple reusable components, and the way Rust handles compatibility between Rust libraries, makes it easier to break down functionality into smaller reusable units.

Underlying Toolkit

Posted Dec 29, 2025 18:30 UTC (Mon) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link] (1 responses)

Of particular note, Qt predates the STL, so even `std::string` was being reinvented everywhere. Once it did show up, it didn't have the same features (e.g., CoW) everywhere, so `QString` persisted.

Underlying Toolkit

Posted Dec 30, 2025 16:15 UTC (Tue) by mbunkus (subscriber, #87248) [Link]

Additionally QString & all of Qt's other container classes have so many useful functions that using them over the STL equivalents is basically a no-brainer. It's sooooooo much easier, both to write and to read. There's sooooooooooooo much more functionality, too.