Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0
On 6/5/08, Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Sure, both systems need some reflection capabilities, which neither C
> nor C++ support natively. I don't see how this point would debunk the
> fact that C++ is a more expressive language than C, and that writing
> an object-oriented application in C++ is generally easier and more
> pleasant than writing it in C.
>
> I know that C++ has its share of issues, and I do understand why in
> the nineties, the GLib people decided to use C and not C++. I actually
> agree with their decision. Yet, if some people claim that "Qt is
> superior because it chose C++", trying to disprove them with the above
> argument is like trying to oppose general relativity with "because my
> aunt Lilly likes to drink tea".
I'm not familiar with Qt, I only repeat what I've heard; Qt is
superior because it renders faster. Planing to solve the issues in
GTK+ that will improve performance is useful, advocating C++ is not.
I doubt 3.0 will be in C++, 4.0, and possibly any other release. Can
we focus on productive discussions?
Best regards.
P.S. Me, and many developers hate C++ with passion, if a toolkit
requires C++, it's cutting a huge user-base.
--
Felipe Contreras
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@xxxxxxxxx
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list