What programming language ruby, python og javascript?
from diy@sh.itjust.works to programming@programming.dev on 07 Jun 15:01
https://sh.itjust.works/post/20491440

I’m looking for a programming language that can help me build a desktop application for Windows, macOS, and Linux that’s not big but not small either. Additionally, I’d like to be able to build a website with the same language. I’ve been considering Ruby, Python, Golang and JavaScript. Python seems to be mainly used for scripting and ai, so I’m not sure if it’s the best fit. JavaScript has a lot of negative opinions surrounding it, while Ruby sounds interesting. Can anyone recommend a language that meets my requirements?

#programming

threaded - newest

sirico@feddit.uk on 07 Jun 15:09 next collapse

I would start with Python it’ll help demystify a lot of programming terminology and methods. I have managed to avoid JS for now but I have to learn it and for web you need at least a basic amount plus you could prob stay in the JS ecosystem for pretty much everything you want to do. Ruby is cool it’s coming back but like Python it tends to be more common on the back-end, that being said there’s some really interesting languages that have spun off it.

I would go Python till you hit a wall it’ll prob be the GUI then learn JS

diy@sh.itjust.works on 07 Jun 15:14 collapse

If I want to build websites and gui apps, would you still recommend using Python over JavaScript.

sirico@feddit.uk on 07 Jun 15:26 collapse

Python is good for quick results and it’ll help maintain a good hits as your learning. But no there’s a reason JS is so popular and people keep spinning up tools based off it.

You will need more that just one language, if you think you can stay self-motivated for your goals I’d go JS.

banghida@lemm.ee on 07 Jun 15:10 next collapse

Python can do both scripts and desktop apps no problems

diy@sh.itjust.works on 07 Jun 15:19 next collapse

But what about websites.

eager_eagle@lemmy.world on 07 Jun 15:23 next collapse

I’m writing a web app on Python + HTMX. Little to none javascript involved.

If it’s something simple you can check out FastAPI. For more complicated projects involving data models and relationships, check out Django.

banghida@lemm.ee on 07 Jun 17:09 next collapse

May I recommend Litestar over FastApi?

eager_eagle@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 00:16 collapse

<img alt="" src="https://i.imgflip.com/4vjvkx.jpg">

abbadon420@lemm.ee on 08 Jun 20:15 collapse

I’ve heard a word or two about htmx. How’s that? Any recommendations on how to start a first project with it?

MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml on 07 Jun 15:25 next collapse

It can do back ends with django and flask but the only choice for front ends is javascript or something like htmx

tatterdemalion@programming.dev on 08 Jun 02:06 collapse

Javascript

WASM

Asudox@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 10:24 collapse

Yeah, I’ve been using Rust with Leptos and Axum for a website I’ve been working on. Works great tbh. I don’t even know JS.

balder1993@programming.dev on 07 Jun 17:19 collapse

So many websites out there are built on Django, Flask, etc. (YouTube must have spent a decade using Python, Instagram, Threads etc. all use Python and optimize as they need).

sping@lemmy.sdf.org on 07 Jun 16:13 next collapse

But use type annotations everywhere and make sure your code is always checker clean (with checkin or PR CI hooks). And don’t turn off any lint checks through laziness, e.g. docstring checks. Even for a solo dev it’s always worth having everything typed, checker clean, and docstrings (even if they only effectively say “this thing really is what you’d assume”). It all saves time and effort in the long and even medium term.

I’ve worked on serious large scale Python projects and frankly it’s been very pleasant and productive, but only with the above conditions.

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 09 Jun 06:48 collapse

Yeah but be prepared for a lot of pain if you want to distribute your app. Python tooling/infra is abysmal.

banghida@lemm.ee on 09 Jun 07:46 collapse

True

roadrunner_ex@lemmy.ca on 07 Jun 15:13 next collapse

If “build the server and client in the same language” is a hard requirement, I believe your only choice is JavaScript…

The tone of the post makes me think you’re newer to programming, so I’ll leave it at that, as extensions to this question can overwhelm quickly, but yeah, JavaScript is a fine language for what you’re doing

diy@sh.itjust.works on 07 Jun 15:18 next collapse

Thank you alot for the response. And yes, I don’t have a lot of programming experience

RonSijm@programming.dev on 08 Jun 18:56 collapse

If “build the server and client in the same language” is a hard requirement, I believe your only choice is JavaScript…

You can probably also use Java. And I’ve used dotnet / c# for it. You can build the server in ASP-core, and a desktop client in Avalonia, or a website in Blazor

slazer2au@lemmy.world on 07 Jun 15:15 next collapse

Without saying what you want the app to do you can’t pick the language, it’s like saying what should I make my house out of? wood, concrete, or ice.
Electron is a well known framework for multiplatform apps. It could be your starting point.

dneaves@lemmy.world on 07 Jun 15:44 next collapse

To be fair, all three can probably do what you’re asking for, in building a desktop application. So the real question comes as which flavor of language do you want to write. The only language of the three I can’t speak on is Ruby, as I haven’t used it.

Python is a “scripting language”, but by that token technically so is Javascript. It’s an immensely popular language due to its simple syntax, yet complex features as you get better with it. Python can build large-ish applications: web apps, desktop apps, terminal apps, and yes also of course AI, bulk data processing, etc. For GUI applications, I’ve personally used pyqt (4? 5? 6?)

Much of the same can be said for Javascript. As you said, there are “negative opinions” about JS, but everyone has their opinions (most factually-based) on the goods and bads of languages (although, yes, JS does get more negative opinions than others). Yet, Javascript is still a widely used language, and you’ll probably end up needing learning it anyway if you decide to go into web development.

What I personally suggest is this:

  • See the learn x in y minutes pages for Python, Javascript, and Ruby. Make sense of the quick-tour of the languages.
  • Make a simple project using each of the three languages. Something that just reads something from STDIN, does some work, prints stuff, as an example. This helps you get to know the basics of the syntax, tooling, and quirks of a language, and helps you narrow down which language you’d like to be working further with.
  • Pick one of the languages you’re leaning in favor of and go build your application. If you come to a point where you feel like the language you choose is no longer suitable for what you wanted to do, you can always retry with another language, and then you will know at least a fair part of more than one language.
diy@sh.itjust.works on 07 Jun 16:34 collapse

I think I’ll just focus on learning one thing at a time to get a better feel for the basic concepts, rather than worrying about what’s the best approach and then try out some, thanks a lot for the response! It really helped me decide to just get started instead of dwelling on the details.

Azzu@lemm.ee on 07 Jun 15:55 next collapse

There’s no answer to this. All can do what you want in varying degrees. With Opal you can compile Ruby to JavaScript for your frontend for example. Or with electron you can use JavaScript as desktop application.

You gotta say much more about the actual requirements to make any meaningful comparison.

BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world on 07 Jun 17:10 next collapse

One of the reasons I think JS gets a lot of hate is the tooling is a bit of a mess. If you go that route I encourage you to generate or find a barebones project to start from. Getting that very first “Hello World” app to run can be a massive pain in the ass.

I also don’t think the requirement to a desktop app and website in the same language is being fair. It’s definitely possible but different languages have different strengths. It shouldn’t make your brain explode to deal with more than one language and I think you could benefit from a shift in mindset. When I’m in JS world I know l I’ve gotta let go of performance and security desires (i.e. JS in the browser is a “clear box” and users can fully control it). When I’m in Java I know those things are highly important but also to not stress about “presentation”.

Hammerheart@programming.dev on 07 Jun 17:42 next collapse

Im biased here, ive been learning python for almost 16 months and only dabbled in Javascript and never did any Ruby, but for a first language, i think python is fantastic. Its “easy” enough to keep you feeling like your skill is actually improving, while still being able to do pretty much anything (where performance is not a high priority). I also just think javascript is ugly to look at.

MajorHavoc@programming.dev on 07 Jun 18:26 next collapse

Just a bit more perspective for you:

survey.stackoverflow.co/2023/#technology-most-pop…

More than half of professional developers use at least some JavaScript, and almost half of us also use Python.

So both of those are likely to be worth the effort to learn.

That said, as a diehard Python programmer, if I was forced to pick a single language to focus on, it would be JavaScript. JavaScript runs almost everywhere, and it specifically is the only decent option in a few places, such as Web app browser code.

But also, while I’m fluent in a couple dozen languages, my preferred go-to language is still Python.

mox@lemmy.sdf.org on 07 Jun 19:00 next collapse

desktop application for Windows, macOS, and Linux

Nothing does cross-platform desktop apps as well as Qt.

Definitely not Electron, which is very wasteful of system resources and has endless desktop integration bugs. Not Flutter. Not WxWidgets. Not Gtk. Not any of the various Java or Rust frameworks. Not Dear ImGui. Nothing. (Well, I haven’t tried Lazarus yet, but it requires a language that’s not on your list, so is probably not relevant here.)

Some of the newer frameworks might shape up eventually, but it would take years of focused effort. This is an area of computing that is difficult to do well.

I’ve been considering Ruby, Python, Golang and JavaScript

Of those languages, I would choose Python with either PySide or PyQt. If my interface needs were very simple, I might also consider Qt Quick, which lets you build GUIs with JavaScript and a declarative language called QML.

diy@sh.itjust.works on 07 Jun 19:09 collapse

Thanks i will look into PySide and PyQt. I also think all kde apps are build with Qt

liliumstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 08 Jun 04:03 collapse

I can vouch for PyQt, it works quite well for what it is. Be aware you might have to dig into the C++ docs if you’re trying to do something non-trivial.

If you like, you can use Qt Creator to build the GUI template, and then basically import into Python and build all the logic.

Anticorp@lemmy.world on 07 Jun 20:50 next collapse

You’re probably looking for Java. Not JavaScript, Java.

diy@sh.itjust.works on 07 Jun 21:16 next collapse

Why java

g_the_b@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 01:03 next collapse

Because it’s 2003

Anticorp@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 03:07 collapse

I missed the part where you said you’re also interested in building a website. Java is a popular and powerful programming language for desktop and mobile development. You can also use it with a framework for back-end website development, but there are better options out there. If you want something that does everything you posted then JavaScript is actually a good option. You’ll need frameworks for back-end website development and desktop development, but it’s kind of a beginner friendly language, and ChatGPT can help you set up the frameworks. It does get complicated working in the different stacks though. What do you want to build first?

tatterdemalion@programming.dev on 08 Jun 02:08 collapse

They explicitly said they want to build a website. Not that you can’t go far with a Java server + HTML(X) but JS is the de facto standard for interactive websites.

Anticorp@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 03:01 collapse

Idk how I missed that. I only saw the desktop program part and the languages listed after it. I completely overlooked the website part, unless it was edited or something. But yeah, for websites JavaScript is the go-to for front-end and there are even some decent back-end options these days, although development and deployment gets a lot more complicated if you go that route. Java is still popular as a backend language for website development, and there are frameworks that have out of the box components that give you the JavaScript for free, but they’re typically expensive enterprise solutions like Adobe Experience Manager.

Edit: I just checked and it was edited, so they might have added that part after I wrote my reply.

Turun@feddit.de on 07 Jun 21:13 next collapse

Definitely JS if you want to also have a website. Use electron to turn your website into an executable for the desktop. Python+qt is ok for Desktop apps, but does not work for a website.

Languages that compile to wasm would also be an option, (e.g. egui.rs with rust), but as far as i am aware none of the languages you’ve listed are in that set. (Only go would even be a contender between python, ruby, js and go)

namelivia@lemmy.world on 07 Jun 23:15 collapse

Electron is the way to go for what the OP described

ClemaX@lemm.ee on 07 Jun 21:23 next collapse

Maybe you should consider a server & client architecture to use the right tool for the right job on each platform.

whotookkarl@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 01:41 next collapse

Spend a week or two with each if you can, even if you don’t stick with any you’ll be able to tell what parts you did or didn’t prefer or found difficult or easy that might help make a more informed choice. You might prefer the language features or syntax of one, but the tool chain or frameworks of another.

tatterdemalion@programming.dev on 08 Jun 02:13 next collapse

I think it would help narrow things down if you described what kind of website you want to build.

mojo_raisin@lemmy.world on 08 Jun 04:01 next collapse

If Ruby is interesting, check out Crystal, it’s like Ruby but static typed and compiled.

bizdelnick@lemmy.ml on 08 Jun 06:54 next collapse

Take a look at Dart+Flutter.

Python would be OK. Ruby is nearly dead nowadays. JS itself is used rarely, better consider using TS (however I don’t recommend using them for anything other than web frontend). Go is a great language but it’s unpopular in GUI development.

Slimy_hog@programming.dev on 08 Jun 14:58 collapse

Interesting bunch of takes…

Take a look at Dart+Flutter.

Google just laid off those teams so I doubt this is a good thing to learn if you want something useful in the long-term

Ruby is nearly dead nowadays

Demonstrably false. My career has been in the Ruby/Rails world and I just went through a job hunt where I found tons of Ruby positions

JS itself is used rarely, better consider using TS (however I don’t recommend using them for anything other than web frontend)

Full-stack JS/TS is very popular in the web-dev world.

Go is a great language

I disagree, but this is 100% a personal opinion of mine 😄

Miaou@jlai.lu on 08 Jun 09:38 next collapse

All three are scripting language. Don’t touch JavaScript, but consider typescript instead. Your requirements are vague, but python should probably be your first choice. It honestly does not matter which one you choose

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 09 Jun 07:01 next collapse

You can count Ruby out immediately. Terrible language.

Also replace JavaScript with Typescript. It’s strictly superior.

I don’t think Go has any mature GUI libraries.

For desktop GUI your main options are:

  • Qt, via C++. Probably the best option but if you don’t know C++ that’s a huge barrier.
  • Qt, via Python. Reasonable but Python is quite a shit language. It’s very slow and the tooling/infrastructure is absolutely abysmal. Be prepared to bang your head against the wall trying to e.g. get relative imports to work.
  • Dart/Flutter. This is quite nice but not super mature for desktop apps. Also the Dart ecosystem is very small so libraries you want may not be available.
  • Electron/Typescript. This is quite a good option. Nobody here will recommend this because nerds have a slightly weird hatred of Electron because the minimum download size is like 80MB. But normally it doesn’t really matter. Especially for big apps.

For the web frontend you basically want Typescript. For the backend you can use literally any language.

I would recommend Electron for the GUI and Typescript for the web frontend and Electron GUI. It means you can use the same language everywhere and you won’t need to even implement the same program twice.

If you’re worried about the download size / RAM usage you can look into Tauri which uses your OS’s browser engine. I’ve never used it though.

tyler@programming.dev on 10 Jun 16:45 next collapse

You can count Ruby out immediately. Terrible language.

wow.

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 16 Jun 06:47 collapse

Ever tried to follow a large Ruby codebase like Gitlab? Absolutely nightmare. Not only does it not have type annotations, so you can’t follow code by clicking, but you can’t even follow it by grepping because Rubyists seem to love generated identifiers. Even the syntax of the language makes grepping worse, e.g. the lack of brackets prevents you from grepping for function calls like foo(.

tyler@programming.dev on 17 Jun 22:30 collapse

You’re talking about rails. That’s like saying Kotlin is a terrible language because your only exposure to it is with something that decided to use Glassfish Webfly Swarm and Camel.

type annotations

You can literally follow code perfectly fine in an IDE like RubyMine. It actually works much better than Python because Ruby is incredibly consistent in its language design, while Python is an absolute mess (same with JS. Try opening a large Python or JS project in PyCharm or WebStorm).

No clue what you’re talking about with grepping though. Use an IDE like I said and you can literally just “Find all usages” or “Jump to declaration”, etc.

In any case, you shouldn’t be using any of these for large projects like gitlab, so it’s completely inconsequential. Saying something like “Java is terrible, have you ever used it for a CLI? It’s so slow it’s impossible to do anything!” is idiotic because of course it is. That’s not what it’s built for. Ruby is a scripting language. Use it for scripting. It kicks Python’s ass for many reasons, JS is terrible for scripting, and while you can use something like bash or rust, the situation is incredibly painful for both.

None of this has absolutely anything to do with the language design. You’re talking about language design and equating it to being terrible and then saying it’s because you don’t use any sort of tools to actually make it work.

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 19 Jun 21:45 collapse

You’re talking about rails.

Maybe other Ruby code is better, but people always say Rails is the killer app of Ruby so…

Use an IDE like I said and you can literally just “Find all usages” or “Jump to declaration”, etc.

That only works if you have static type annotations, which seems to be very rare in the Ruby world.

In any case, you shouldn’t be using any of these for large projects like gitlab, so it’s completely inconsequential.

Well, I agree you shouldn’t use Ruby for large projects like Gitlab. But why use it for anything?

tyler@programming.dev on 20 Jun 05:01 collapse

Maybe other Ruby code is better, but people always say Rails is the killer app of Ruby so…

I’ve literally never heard anyone say that…

That only works if you have static type annotations, which seems to be very rare in the Ruby world.

no. it literally works for any ruby code in any project. you do not need static type annotations at all. I can tell you’ve literally never even tried this…

Well, I agree you shouldn’t use Ruby for large projects like Gitlab. But why use it for anything?

because it’s a fantastic scripting language with a runtime that is available on almost every platform on the planet by default (yes most linux distributions include it, compared to something like python which is hardly ever included and if it is it’s 2.x instead of 3.x). It’s also much more readable than bash, python, javascript, etc. so writing a readable (and runnable everywhere) script is dead simple. Writing CLIs with it is also dead simple, while I think Python has a few better libraries for this like Click, Ruby is much more portable than Python (this isn’t my opinion, this is experience from shipping both ruby and python clis for years).

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 21 Jun 16:19 collapse

I’ve literally never heard anyone say that

Well you didn’t listen then. Google the phrase.

I can tell you’ve literally never even tried this…

I do not need to try it to know that this is fundamental impossible. But I will try it because you can go some way towards proper type knowledge without explicit annotations (e.g. Pycharm can do this for Python) and it’s better than nothing (but still not as good as actual type annotations).

It’s also much more readable than bash, python, javascript, etc. so writing a readable (and runnable everywhere)

Bash definitely. Not sure I’d agree for Python though. That’s extremely readable.

tyler@programming.dev on 23 Jun 16:37 collapse

Jump to declarations or usages has absolutely nothing to do with types so I have no clue why you think type annotations to make jump to useful.

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 23 Jun 18:52 collapse

Oh really? How would an IDE go-to-definition on x.bar in this code?

def foo(x):
  return x.bar

Best it can do is heuristics and guesswork.

tyler@programming.dev on 24 Jun 04:01 collapse

By using the AST? Do you really not know how languages work? I mean seriously, this is incredibly basic stuff. You don’t need to know the type to jump to the ast node location. Do you think that formatters for dynamic languages need to know the type in order to format them properly? Then why in the world would you need it to know where to jump to in a type definition!?!

Edit: also in the case of Ruby, the entire thing runs on a VM which used to be YARV but I think might have changed recently. So there’s literally bytecode providing all the information needed to run it. I highly recommend reading a book about how the Ruby internals work since you seem to think you understand but it’s quite clear you don’t, or for some reason think “jump to” is this magical thing that requires types.

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 26 Jun 21:35 collapse

I think you’re getting a bit confused. How do you know where x’s type is defined and therefore where x.bar is defined if you don’t know what type x is? It’s literally impossible. Best you can do is global type inference but that has very big limitations and is not really feasible in a language that wasn’t designed for it.

Do you think that formatters for dynamic languages need to know the type in order to format them properly? Then why in the world would you need it to know where to jump to in a type definition!?!

Not sure if that is a serious question, but it’s because formatting doesn’t depend on the type of variables but going to the definition of a field obviously depends on the type that the field is in.

Maybe my example was not clear enough for you - I guess it’s possible you’ve never experienced working intellisense, so you don’t understand the feature I’m describing.

class A:
  bar: int

class B:
  bar: str

def foo(x):
  return x.bar

Ctrl-click on bar. Where does it jump to?

tyler@programming.dev on 27 Jun 15:45 collapse

Not sure if that is a serious question, but it’s because formatting doesn’t depend on the type of variables but going to the definition of a field obviously depends on the type that the field is in.

formatting does depend on the type of variables. Go look at ktfmt’s codebase and come back after you’ve done so…

Maybe my example was not clear enough for you - I guess it’s possible you’ve never experienced working intellisense, so you don’t understand the feature I’m describing.

Lol, nice try with the insult there. I code in Kotlin, my intellisense works just fine. I just think you’re quite ignorant and have no clue what you’re actually talking about.

Ctrl-click on bar. Where does it jump to?

it gives you an option, just like if it was an interface. Did you actually try this out before commenting? Guessing not. And how often are you naming functions the exact same thing across two different classes without using an interface? And if you were using an interface intellisense would work the exact same way, giving you the option to jump to any of the implementations.

I’m sorry, but you clearly haven’t thought this out, or you’re really quite ignorant as to how intellisense works in all languages (including Ruby, and including statically typed languages).

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 27 Jun 16:24 collapse

formatting does depend on the type of variables. Go look at ktfmt’s codebase and come back after you’ve done so…

I skimmed it. It appears to visit the AST of the code and format that, as any formatter does. ASTs have not been type checked.

Can you give an example?

it gives you an option, just like if it was an interface. Did you actually try this out before commenting?

Precisely! It doesn’t know the answer so it has to guess, or make you guess.

And how often are you naming functions the exact same thing across two different classes without using an interface?

You mean how often does the same field name come up more than once? All the time obviously! Think about common names like id, size, begin, children, etc. etc.

I’m sorry, but you clearly haven’t thought this out, or you’re really quite ignorant as to how intellisense works in all languages (including Ruby, and including statically typed languages).

I’m sorry but you clearly haven’t thought this through, or you’re just happy to ignore the limitations of Ruby. I suspect the latter. Please don’t pretend they aren’t limitations though. It’s ok to say “yes this isn’t very good but I like Ruby anyway”.

bellsDoSing@lemm.ee on 12 Jun 11:38 collapse

Regarding tauri: One and a half years ago I looked into it as a potential alternative to using electron.

Back then I had to decide against it for my use case, because when the goal is that it’s a cross platform app, then one has to make sure that whatever “webview version” is used on all target OS, they all have to support the features one needs re one’s own app codebase. Back then I needed some “offscreen canvas” feature that chromium supported (hence electron), but which webkit2gtk (used on Linux) didn’t at the time.

tauri.app/v1/references/webview-versions/

So it’s not always easy to give a clear recommendation on using tauri over electron. One really has to get somewhat clear on what kind of “webview requirements” the resp. app will have.

But I do hope this will (or maybe already is) less of an issue in upcoming years (things are moving fast after all).

Kissaki@programming.dev on 09 Jun 07:41 next collapse

For a desktop app I would go with none of those.

If cross platform is the goal, the more important question, and independent of the programming language, is which GUI framework you will use.

Your best bet, at least if you are looking for a stable GUI framework, the best candidate may be C++ and Qt. But that’s a hassle in its own right - both C++ and Qt.

TypeScript will have some solutions for you, with web rendering as a desktop app. Golang will have Qt bindings or other more experimental/not thoroughly established+popular GUI frameworks.

My personal favorite ecosystem is .NET. It has an official cross-platform UI project MAUI, but without an official Linux target. Community extensions probably exist. Personally, I dislike the way the UI is declared and bound though (XAML).

My current interest, which I have not explored or validate yet, is using .NET but then host a web or Blazor app in it with Webview2. .NET supports cross-boundary programming, crossing web+managed/native development, and crossing web(HTML+JS)+managed.

Most of the time GUI and the framework technology is a hassle. Your question is too broad and unspecific, so there’s not a good answer.

If it’s not a “serious” project that you depend on [for your livelihood], pick and start with whatever [looks good or interesting] and go from there. If it is a “serious project” do a bit more GUI framework exploration and assessment, and pick and commit to something. If it’s a big commitment or risk, do prototyping with your candidates for verification and assessment - beyond the most simple examples, and for your specific usage.

SmartmanApps@programming.dev on 09 Jun 09:03 collapse

Personally, I dislike the way the UI is declared and bound though (XAML)

You can write the MAUI UI in C#. No need to use XAML anywhere.

Creating MAUI UI’s in C#

sparkle@lemm.ee on 09 Jun 08:54 next collapse

JS or really anything you’d make a web app in (I use Rust with something like Dioxus/Yew/Leptos/Tauri), C#/.NET (I use F# because OO-style languages are ugly and a hot mess, especially C# and Java), Java/JVM (I use Scala whenever I can and Kotlin otherwise), C++ with GTK or Qt. There are a lot of options but obviously anything that’s not C++ or web is gonna give you a lackluster experience (though I have a thing against web apps and will go through a lot of hoops to have my application use a native interface)

matcha_addict@lemy.lol on 11 Jun 17:04 collapse

Most people use JavaScript for this nowadays, but most commentary also hates on it.

I’ll be real with you. There’s a reason JavaScript keeps being chosen despite the hate. It’s so much easier and the dev experience is much more polished for creating desktop apps.

The reason it’s hated on is that it is running a browser in the background, which people view as too bloated for a desktop app. Moreover, JS tends not to play well with system-wide themeing like GTK or QT.

But in the end, as a developer, you’ll be dealing with a lot of messiness going with anything else. If you’re up for a challenge, do try other things. But if you just want something that works and looks nice, do Js