Michael Torrie schrieb:
> jvette...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
>> I find that deriving classes in C++ is alot easier than going through
>> the GObject type system.
>
> Yes this is true, in C. GTKmm makes things rather nice if you work in
> C++. In fact I kind of like how GTKmm works without a
jvette...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
> I find that deriving classes in C++ is alot easier than going through
> the GObject type system.
Yes this is true, in C. GTKmm makes things rather nice if you work in
C++. In fact I kind of like how GTKmm works without a preprocessor,
with type-safe call
Some of my thoughts on the matter:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:10:42AM -0600, Thomas Stover wrote:
> ...
> -QT (last time I checked) is not even C++. It's C++ and a custom macro
> language. building ouch. debugging ouch. C++ paradigm ouch.
The Qt macros aren't very intrusive.
Once you have your
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Jack wrote:
> I believe the original question was gkt+ vs qt.
I don't believe there was a question
And this is all fairly offtopic for this list.
So lets stop it now before it gets silly.
iain
___
gtk-app-devel-list mai
been some interesting issues, but
it is certainly possible. (See my other post on problems parsing rc files.)
From: "Andersen, Jan"
To: gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:22:47 PM
Subject: RE: qt vs gtk
As someone who has re
Andersen, Jan wrote:
> 1. X used to display a small "label" containing the position and size
> of a window when you moved it. That was one feature I found hugely
> useful; I usually have 9 desktops and organise my applications with
> fixed dimensions and positions different desktops - like Pidgin o
As someone who has recently stopped using GNOME, let me give my viewpoint,
then, about why I have stopped using it. It isn't so much knee-jerk, I would
hope, as simple, everyday usefulness. It was not an easy decision for me to
leave and start using KDE - I have used GNOME from the beginning and
