Add Widgets for easier use.

[dosgo]

I compared it with cogentcore. The documentation of cogentcore is concise and clear, and you can understand it at a glance, while the documentation of fyne is indeed more difficult to understand and the design is more complicated. I think the biggest design of a UI framework is simplicity, otherwise HTML and Vue would not be so popular. Just copy the widgets of HTML, of course, this may not be the same as your goal.

[andydotxyz]

Can you be more specific about why widget.NewLabel("Hello") or widget.NewButton("TapMe", func() {}) isn't clear?

In general https://docs.fyne.io seems well received, what do you think is missing?

[Jacalz]

I suspect it would be much easier to use use one toolkit instead of two

[andydotxyz]

The amount of code can be reduced by one-third,

The length of code for those two main.go is almost identical

[dosgo]

I suspect it would be much easier to use use one toolkit instead of two

Alas, I had written it with cogentcore, but found that it did not support Chinese and trays, and then there were some inexplicable bugs, so I had to rewrite it with fyne.

[andydotxyz]

So your assessment of the Fyne API or documentation is in comparison with Cogent Core? If that is the case can you show what you think they have done well that we have not managed?

Thanks

[dosgo]

That's right! Cogent Core has a simple and clear layout, and most functions are implemented through widgets. The data binding function is powerful. The code is simple and clear. The widget operation method is unified. However, Cogent Core is not stable at present.
fyne has too many layout methods, which makes it difficult to get started, and there are fewer widgets. There are many usage restrictions, such as the font color needs to be defined in the theme. For me, I just want to quickly implement a cross-platform interface. . fyne is powerful and stable, but it is quite complicated. I was refreshed by the structure binding function of Cogent Core a few days ago, so I posted this discussion.

[andydotxyz]

re: Layouts:

Fyne has taken the decision that many, simple, layouts is cleaner and more composible than fewer, more complex, layout or container constructs.

re: data binding:

I'm not clear on what you think the deficciency of Fyne data binding is - it aims to be pretty clean and simple just like the rest of our API. https://docs.fyne.io/explore/binding.

re: standard colours:

The widget package contains standard widgets that respect the loaded theme - though as I noted above this is completely customisable. If you want canvas level control there is a separate package that defines the lower level objects which widgets are composed of - and it has no knowledge of the theme.

For me, I just want to quickly implement a cross-platform interface

Ironically our design choices were indeed made with that in mind: simple layouts, standard themeing and widget API that defines behaviour instead of a load of themeing options is designed with that in mind.

I am going to close this down as a disagreement on API design and not indicative of anything we need to change.