Pros of lxn/walk

• lxn/walk provides a more comprehensive set of UI components and controls, including advanced features like data binding and event handling.
• The documentation and community support for lxn/walk are generally more extensive and well-maintained.
• lxn/walk has a more active development community, with regular updates and bug fixes.

Cons of lxn/walk

• The learning curve for lxn/walk may be steeper, as it has a larger API and more complex features.
• lxn/walk is primarily focused on Windows, while visualfc/goqt supports multiple platforms, including Windows, macOS, and Linux.
• The performance of lxn/walk may be slightly lower compared to visualfc/goqt, as it is a higher-level abstraction.

Code Comparison

Here's a simple example of creating a window with a button in both visualfc/goqt and lxn/walk:

visualfc/goqt:

app := qt.NewQApplication(len(os.Args), os.Args)
window := qt.NewQMainWindow(nil, 0)
window.SetWindowTitle("My Window")
button := qt.NewQPushButton2("Click me", window)
window.SetCentralWidget(button)
window.Show()
app.Exec()

lxn/walk:

func main() {
    app := walk.NewApplication()
    window := walk.NewMainWindow()
    window.SetTitle("My Window")
    button := walk.NewPushButton(window)
    button.SetText("Click me")
    window.SetCentralWidget(button)
    window.Run()
}

Pros of therecipe/qt

• Supports a wider range of Qt modules, including Qt3D, Qt Multimedia, and Qt WebEngine.
• Provides a more comprehensive set of bindings for the Qt framework.
• Offers better cross-platform support, with builds available for Windows, macOS, and Linux.

Cons of therecipe/qt

• May have a steeper learning curve due to the larger codebase and more complex API.
• Requires more dependencies to be installed, which can make the setup process more involved.
• May have slower development and release cycles compared to visualfc/goqt.

Code Comparison

visualfc/goqt:

app := qt.NewQApplication(len(os.Args), os.Args)
window := qt.NewQMainWindow(nil, 0)
window.SetWindowTitle("Hello, Qt!")
window.Show()
app.Exec()

therecipe/qt:

app := widgets.NewQApplication(len(os.Args), os.Args)
window := widgets.NewQMainWindow(nil, 0)
window.SetWindowTitle("Hello, Qt!")
window.Show()
app.Exec()

Pros of Fyne

• Fyne is a cross-platform GUI toolkit, allowing developers to create applications that run on multiple operating systems (Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, and Android) with a single codebase.
• Fyne has a modern and responsive design, with a focus on providing a consistent user experience across different platforms.
• Fyne is actively maintained and has a growing community of contributors, ensuring ongoing development and support.

Cons of Fyne

• Fyne is a relatively new project, with a smaller ecosystem and fewer resources compared to more established GUI frameworks like Qt.
• The learning curve for Fyne may be steeper for developers who are more familiar with other GUI frameworks.
• Fyne's performance may not be as optimized as some other GUI frameworks, especially for complex or resource-intensive applications.

Code Comparison

Fyne:

app := app.New()
window := app.NewWindow("Hello")
window.SetContent(widget.NewLabel("Hello, Fyne!"))
window.ShowAndRun()

GoQT:

app := qt.NewQApplication(len(os.Args), os.Args)
window := widgets.NewQMainWindow(nil, 0)
window.SetWindowTitle("Hello, GoQT!")
label := widgets.NewQLabel(window, 0)
label.SetText("Hello, GoQT!")
window.SetCentralWidget(label)
window.Show()
app.Exec()

Pros of gotk3/gotk3

• Actively maintained and regularly updated, with a larger contributor base.
• Provides a more comprehensive set of widgets and functionality compared to goqt.
• Supports the latest version of the GTK+ toolkit, ensuring compatibility with modern systems.

Cons of gotk3/gotk3

• Steeper learning curve due to the complexity of the GTK+ toolkit.
• May have a smaller ecosystem of third-party libraries and resources compared to goqt.
• Requires more boilerplate code to set up a basic application.

Code Comparison

goqt:

app := qt.NewQApplication(len(os.Args), os.Args)
window := qt.NewQMainWindow(nil, 0)
window.SetWindowTitle("My Qt App")
window.Show()
app.Exec()

gotk3:

app := gtk.NewApplication("com.example.app", glib.APPLICATION_FLAGS_NONE)
app.Connect("activate", func() {
    win := gtk.NewApplicationWindow(app)
    win.SetTitle("My GTK App")
    win.ShowAll()
})
app.Run(os.Args)

Pros of andlabs/ui

• Supports multiple platforms (Windows, macOS, and Linux) out of the box, providing a consistent user experience across different operating systems.
• Offers a simple and intuitive API, making it easier for developers to build cross-platform GUI applications.
• Provides a wide range of built-in widgets and controls, reducing the need for custom implementations.

Cons of andlabs/ui

• Relatively smaller community and ecosystem compared to visualfc/goqt, which may result in fewer resources and third-party libraries available.
• May have limited customization options compared to visualfc/goqt, as the focus is on providing a consistent cross-platform experience.
• Potentially slower development pace and fewer updates compared to the more active visualfc/goqt project.

Code Comparison

visualfc/goqt:

app := qt.NewQApplication(len(os.Args), os.Args)
window := qt.NewQMainWindow(nil, 0)
window.SetWindowTitle("My Qt Application")
window.SetGeometry2(100, 100, 800, 600)
window.Show()
app.Exec()

andlabs/ui:

app := ui.NewApplication()
window := ui.NewWindow("My UI Application")
window.SetSize(800, 600)
window.Show()
app.Run()