Re: qt vs gtk

[Stefan Kost <ensonic hora-obscura de>]

Michael Torrie schrieb:
> jvetterli users sourceforge net wrote:
> > I find that deriving classes in C++ is alot easier than going through 
> > the GObject type system.
>
> Yes this is true, in C.  GTKmm makes things rather nice if you work in
> C++.  In fact I kind of like how GTKmm works without a preprocessor,
> with type-safe callbacks.  I wish Qt folks would compare Qt against
> GTKmm rather than just GTK+, as they are looking at things from a C++
> point of view anyway.
>
> > When it comes to documentation, Qt really outshines Gtk.  I have never 
> > had to dive through code to figure something out in Qt.  I always have a 
> > copy of the Gtk source code untarred and ready, though.
>
> GTK is always in need of people willing to flesh out the documentation.
>  It is nice that one can refer to the source code in any open source
> project.

Also to kill a myth:
> head docs/reference/gtk/gtk-undocumented.txt
93% symbol docs coverage.
5397 symbols documented.
116 symbols incomplete.
406 not documented.

Its not that bad. What imho is needed, is to move the docs inline (into the
soruces), fill the gaps and extend them. Also the tutorial could be merged and
then benefit from the xrefs (but it would need a general overhaul most probably
before).

Stefan