Re: [gtkmm] (forw) Re: Calling C++ functions

[Murray Cumming <murrayc usa net>]

> On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 08:28, Shahms E. King wrote:
> > If you're trying to do C++ things in GTK+ you might want to have a look
> > at GtkMM (http://www.gtkmm.org). It's a C++ binding for GTK+ that takes
> > care of a lot of those issues for you.
>
> GtkMM looks nice, but it seems like an additional item that is not
> included in my Linux distro RedHat 7.3.
>
> Whether it will be in future RedHat releases?

gtkmm 1.2 has been in RedHat releases for a long time. As far as I know
it is on all other major distributions too. However, RedHat probably
aren't shipping gtkmm2 yet. I'm sure that they will.
 
> It also seems like I may have to compile and install or use a general
> RPM not specific to my distro.

I strongly suggest that you build from source until gtkmm2 is stable.
Others might have a different opinion, but I don't see the point of
non-distro RPMs anyway.

> But in the end will it be worth it. Does GtkMM keep up with the GTK API
> development, and what kind of overhead will it add to my apps if any?

Yes, we try to wrap the whole API, and sometimes more. There isn't any
need to "keep up" with gtkmm development because gtkmm has long periods
of stability in which the API does not change.

As for "overhead", I have never noticed any runtime difference between
GTK+ and gtkmm apps. Any overhead is purely theoretical as far as I can
tell.

> The code of GtkMM is very pretty, and looks like I will end up writing
> less, which is a good thing, I think.

Yes, that's how we feel.

> Although I am wondering it attempting to use it with my distro will
> cause further issues to arise?

No.

> Is anyone using GtkMM on a RedHat 7.x distro, and have you had any
> problems I should be aware of?

There is no need to worry. It's just another library.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net
www.murrayc.com