Re: Announcing: Project Ridley

Jono Bacon <jonobacon gmail com> writes:

> You know, I think this makes perfect sense, so long as much of the
> functionality included does not rely on the GNOME platform per se and
> could be utilised in independent GTK apps.

It's a tradeoff.  There's nothing particularly platformy about a lot of
widgets, but we need to make sure that we don't compromise the desktop

> As someone who has moved from KDE development to GNOME development,
> GTK does some much more of a sporadic toolkit, and feels rather less
> complete than Qt. This is typically down to the following reasons:
>  - There is a wider selection of widgets and classes in Qt, and GTK
> seems to lack many of these and relagate them to external libs. I
> assume this is largely the purpose of Ridley.

Indeed.  As those widgets already existed, there has been less incentive
to fix them up.  It's not really clear (to me) exactly what belongs in a
modern toolkit anyway.

>  - GTK (and I am specifically thinking PyGTK here, which I hack with)
> does not boast as complete and centralised documentation. The Qt
> documentation is centralised ( and has a complete
> selection of not only a superb class reference but also included
> examples and more. Maybe the documentation of the different bindings
> could be somehow optimised in Ridley.

There are separate efforts to improve the documentation.  

>  - The actual toolkit feels a little more difficult to deal with in
> some cases. I am specifically thinking tree views here. Qt seems to
> include more convenience functions.

No comment...


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]