Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

[Paul Davis <paul linuxaudiosystems com>]

On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 20:30 +0200, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 18:51:18 +0100
> Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 19:44 +0200, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote:
> >  
> > > > I don't want to start a flame war over old hat, but statements like this
> > > > shouldn't go unchallenged. GLib/GTK+ chose a different technology as a
> > > > base than Qt did (C vs. C++, and no pre-processing source versus
> > > > preprocessing source).
> > > 
> > > Different, and inferior.
> > 
> > thank you for your interesting and well-detailed take on the design of
> > GLib and GObject.
> 
> Maybe you should also filter out arbitrary words from quotes, it would
> certainly allow for even more brilliant jokes.

the problem is that it was established years ago that your position of
"different and inferior" was an opinion, and one not universally held by
all developers, even those with substantial experience of both
technologies. therefore, its a bit silly to suggest that one technology
should be evolving to match the design of the other, when there are
specific reasons why they differ, and when many people believe that they
should continue to differ.