undefined

points

by rwmj8 hours ago |

comments

by userbinator4 minutes ago|

[-]

Pure Win32 will do exactly what you want. Single tiny .exe that works from Win95 to 11. Even Linux with WINE.

by hermitcrab1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Qt is compiled to a native .exe. It doesn't have a runtime. To give you a rough idea of size, I have 3 GUI application written using Qt/C++. The installers are 72 MB, 69 MB and 32 MB. The first 2 include a significant amount of documentation. I could probably get them a bit smaller if I really needed to.

by Atotalnoob5 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

.net will work. Use a weaver (fody) or the modern features to roll everything into 1 .exe.

Use self-contained to have everything together.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/deploying/sing...

by Conan_Kudo6 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> Edit: Some comments mention Qt which could also work although how large is the runtime? Can it be compiled statically?

You need a commercial license for that, but yes you could. But since applications are typically distributed with install bundles that put into application-local program files directories, it's not super-important as long as you only cherry-pick the Qt libraries you need.

by rubymamis2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

This is wrong. There's a misconception that you can't statically link your app when using the open-source LGPL version of Qt. From my reading of the LGPL license this doesn't appear to be the case[1]. The LGPL allows you to statically link your app as long as you provide the object files and allow users to relink your app with a different version of Qt.

I've observed many people spreading this misinformation about only being able to dynamically link with the LGPL version of Qt. Please stop this.

[1] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynami...

by Conan_Kudo2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yes, that is true, but in practice nobody has ever done that. And the material complexity of offering that mode is higher than just dynamically linking the library.

Also, modern compilers make this method much harder to use. It is much harder to stably relink object files like that than to just use the normal dynamic link method.

by kwanbix8 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Delphi or Lazarus (https://www.lazarus-ide.org) should solve it.

by rwmj7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Nice, I didn't know there was a free software version of Delphi nowadays.

by dardeaup6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

With restrictions of course.