AFAIK, this is not correct, as WxWidgets fits the requirements (it's almost 30 years old, cross-platform and native).
I'm curious though, since I haven't extensively developded GUI applications, which are the pratical tradeoffs against a non-native toolkit like Qt.
I don't buy it, something doesn't add up. The look and feel is somewhat out of place, one can tell with one glance it's not native. https://i.imgur.com/LjDhPOv.png
• The scrollbars are too narrow and have only a down arrow at the bottom instead of a combined up and down arrow.
• The font size is wrong in some places in the hex editor.
• The tab in the tab bar is crooked, not rectangular, and lacks a close button.
• The text has too cramped kerning, most noticable in the word "File".
• The underline for key shortcuts is placed too high.
• The ribbing in the lower-right corner is larger.
• Contrast around the menu bar is too harsh.
• The icon bar does not lock (context menu), and always displays a grabber.
• Menu bar and icon bar do not have a context menu.
• The ribbing on the left-right split bar is different.
• The MDI panel only has a close button but not a detach button. There's a obtrusive gradient in the panel title.
• The progress bar does not have the stripe pattern.
I submit that Wx implements its own non-native widgets.
It does for the widgets that have no native equivalent, such as draggable/dockable tabs/panels that you show. You can't say they differ from native ones because there is just no native version, on any platform.
OTOH all the standard UI elements (buttons, checkboxes, text controls, date pickers, ...) are native and not only they look natively, but also behave natively, which is pretty important and different from Qt.
PoEdit comes the closest to looking genuinely native, but the MacOS implementation is clearly flawed.
Well, let's verify that… https://i.imgur.com/uHfjoUs.png No, they're not.
> draggable/dockable tabs/panels […] You can't say they differ from native ones because there is just no native version
That sounds wrong. Why should they not be? Do you have any proof?
Regardless, since you're accusing a very old and widespread project of lying ("it uses the platform's native API rather than emulating the GUI" on their front page, versus "I submit that Wx implements its own non-native widgets."), you should directly ask on an official channel, and have an authoritative answer.
> since you're accusing a very old and widespread project of lying
http://enwp.org/Appeal_to_accomplishment Nice fallacy, don't think you can pull cheap tricks like that on HN.
But anyway, let them defend themselves; veritas liberabit vos. FWIW I don't think malicious or intentional lies are involved, although a mighty good explanation is required to square their claim against the evidence that it is plain to see.
