bcaccinolo idealx com wrote:
This topic has been rehashed in the past. Surprisingly enough, it just keeps coming up again.For a good implementation of this concept could it be possible to use a real object language?
If gtk were written in a 'real object language' (pick any one you like), there would be no pygtk or gtk# - you'd only have one of them. The main disadvantage of 'real object languages' is their stubborn refusal to properly talk to each other. .NET is no improvement to this - it's still just one VM, and there are others. VMs also refuse to properly talk to each other (marshalling calls and shunting to IPC does not qualify as 'properly', and neither does C++ style of wrapping everything into extern "C" stubs).I really don't want ot troll but I think this could be really interesting to use such a langage. Like Seth has said in his article on gnome journal, there is activity in pygtk and gtk# communities and IMHO it is due to the use of a real object language.
IMHO (and I'm no bigname GNOME developer, so a large grain of salt is advised :) ), C is just right for the low-level of GNOME. That said, GOB makes writing gobjects really, *really* nice. More extensive use of GOB could be something to look at?
Miro