Re: Java Versus gtk

[Harring Figueiredo <harringf yahoo com>]

 Stepping on my soup box again..

--- Karoliina Salminen <karoliinasalminen karoliinasalminen com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to add my opinions and comments to the soup again.
>
> > > | Integrated Developm. Envirs.  | -         | o         | +         |
>
> I think the Qt-Designer + KDevelop together is a very good
> development environment. The way of working feels quite the
> same than it felt using Delphi many years ago.
>
> > > | Complexity / ease to learn    | +         | o         | o         |
>
> I think quite the opposite. From these, Java is the most easy to learn.
> In my opinion, Qt has the second place. On the other hand, because
> of long experience with C, I think GTK is not so hard to use either.
>
> However, I like C++ more than C. I have for example now done a project
> with C that is about 10000 lines long. I think it would have
> been less than 5000 lines long with C++ and would have contained
> a lot less pointers. 
  References in C++ are just pointers -- did you consider that ?
  my_objevt->method(), is just like pointers too.
 
> I was unable to convince
> those decided which language was chosen with my C++ claims.
> Because I think in C++, for me, C++ is kind of easier allthough
> it requires more thinking than plain C where no thinking is required,
> all time goes to writing the code. 
 
  That's the reason you see a lot of ugly C code.. people just don't think..
they just code --   

  They have to realise that C code needs design too.

> C++ requires some design
> work to the class structure that requires understanding what
> is good, elegant and easy to implement.
  
 And that's why C++ is complex and ugly (Just take templates for example).

> The most horrible code I have seen, have been C code where 
> some have tried to make the code look like C++ by using C++ reserved
> words such as this-pointer. 
 
  Yes.. in this case they are trying to write C like C++ and not thinking OO.

  But, OO is not necessarily the best solution for everything.. I think that
people forgot or never realised what OO was supposed to achieve : REUSABILITY.

  and for reusability, a good C program beats the hack out of most languages
(if done right) because it deals with simple functions.

  How many implementations of strstr, strcpy, strcmp are out there ?

  Now compare that with C++ String class -- each and everyone of them has a lot
of *&^% that will never be used by 99% of the programmers -- but they thinks,
hey .. this is a cool feature, so get it even if you do not want.

> I am rather much opposed to that kind
> of writing style. Because of my opinion, our official style guide 
> now states that emulating C++ with C is forbidden.
> In my opinion, it would be a less wrong to do C-like code
> with C++ than to do C++ -like code with C.
>
> Best Regards,
> Karoliina Salminen
>
> /*  
>  * | Karoliina Salminen | karoliinasalminen karoliinasalminen com |
>  * | http://www.karoliinasalminen.com | http://www.ampcast.com/karoliina |
>  *
>  */
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-app-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-app-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list

NOTE: ALL OF THESE ARE MY </em> OPINION </em>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html