Samuel Abels: > > > As nice as Ardour may be, I personaly still prefer the interfaces of > > > modern UI toolkits, in combination with a nice Object Oriented language > > > (aka C++ :) ). > > > > If you want to write C++, why do you want GTK??? Use a C++-toolkit like Qt. > > Despite the fact that this is often discussed as a matter of religion, I > prefer gtkmm because it fits better into the GNOME environment. > > Also, this is from the gtkmm-documentation: > > http://www.murrayc.com/murray/talks/2002/GUADEC3/notes/html/index.html#id2759245 > > "QT originates from a time when C++ was not standardised or well > supported by compilers. Its design today is still based upon the choices > available at that time, so it does not play well with more up-to-date > code. Development of QT is still effectively closed - There is still no > public development mailing list, and TrollTech have the normal corporate > conservatism. As an open-source project, its design would have been > improved through public debate, and it would have been possible to > jettison the baggage. >
<snip> > So, in essence, gtkmm does it in a more C++ way. :-) (But please let us > not make this a flame; may everyone be free to choose whatever toolkit > he likes best. ;) ) Then my question becomes: Why on earth use C++? Use a desent high-level non-crippled language like lisp, python or ruby. The lowlevel stuff must of course be written in c/c++ or something, but only a very small amount of multitracker-code is that low-level. Yes, I have made _huge_ programs in C myself, but that was only because I was so damned inexperienced and had so damned slow machine to work on at the time. Today, where there are so many descent libraries for lisp/python/ruby/ada(?)/etc(?), and the machines are so fast, as good as no one should use c++ for high-level things. You'll waste time. Yes, this might start a flame-war, but I really think people should be aware of the C/C++-stupidness. --
