Re: C vs C++ for GTK

[Patrick <optomatic rogers com>]

Patrick wrote:
> Hi Allin
>
> I have no interest in QT.
>
> Your points are very strong.
>
> If most of the free/libre software is in C then I better stick with C, 
> especially if learning C++ does not guarantee an understanding of 
> plain C.
>
> Thanks very much for your help, it's easy to keep going around in 
> circles over these sorts of things, you have saved me a lot of time.
>
> Have a great weekend-Patrick
>
> P.S thanks to everyone else that posted too!
>
> Allin Cottrell wrote:
> > On Sat, 24 Nov 2007, Patrick wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry for the flame war bait, I know how passionate language debates 
> > > get but I need some guidance. I am using PyGTK right now and I am 
> > > happy with it, but a day is coming soon were the speed limitations 
> > > and less-then-straight-forward threading will be an issue.
> > >
> > > I figure my next move should be to learn C or C++. I would like to 
> > > stay up-to-date with things and I would like to be able to reuse GTK 
> > > code from other Apps.
> > >
> > > I thought that C++ must be the way to go as it can do everything 
> > > that C can "plus plus" but some heavy hitters don't seem enthused 
> > > with it, 
> >
> > I'll restrict myself to the factual.
> > C++ is almost but not exactly a superset of C. However, don't let 
> > that fool you into thinking that if you learn C++ you've 
> > automatically learned C as a bonus. The programming idioms are quite 
> > different in the two languages.
> > One reason for going with C is that the great bulk of free software 
> > is in C, including GLib and GTK. The main exception is Qt, the basis 
> > for KDE. So if you might want to get into KDE programming, maybe 
> > learning C++ would be better.
> >
> > Allin Cottrell.