Re: [gtk-list] Re: announce: yet another gtk+ C++ wrapper (no caps as Owen suggest)

[Michael Babcock <mbabcock la creatureshop henson com>]

Karl Nelson wrote:
> 
> I personally side with Laurent on this one.
> 
> > >- it's confusing to the users
> >
> > i do not think that gtk+ users will be confused, they are not are babies or
> > stupid and can judge what is good and what is garbage :-)
> 
> But there will be some confusion especially when it comes to end
> users.  Why should there be three shared libraries on system, two of
> which are providing wrappers for the same thing?  The question
> becomes how different are they. (not just in writing philosophy,
> but also in end use.)  I had enough trouble trying to sort through
> all the widget sets much or less figure out which wrapper I wanted.
> 

I agree. We actually have three C++ interfaces to Gtk+ now: Gtk--,
wxWindows, and now VDK. I know it's easier and more fun to make your own
new interface from scratch than try to improve an existing library, but
it's less useful in the long run. Now I know, this is the Free Software
world, we're all friends here ;-) and anyone can do whatever they want.
But that doesn't mean we should eliminate criticism.

So we have three interfaces and they all suck. Okay, that's a little
harsh, but they all _are_ immature. We don't have a single one that is
complete, mature, and flexible. It's great that one toolkit (Gtk) is
finally emerging as some sort of standard for Linux, but I worry that
the design seems a little... ad-hoc. I know it's easier to criticize an
existing design than to come up with your own, and I'm not saying I
could do much better, but in the case of graphical toolkits there is a
lot of good prior art out there. Look at Fresco, Java's JFC, OpenStep
for some ideas. Even check the Win32 widget API to make sure there isn't
something simple that it can do that your new Gtk widget can't.

Finally, a minor thing. Any thought of improving Gtk--'s name? As I
understand it, the person who initiated the Gtk-- project didn't like
C++ and isn't even working on it now. C++ users already seem to be
treated enough like second class citizens in the Linux/Gtk world without
a stupid name to rub it in. It also makes it harder to sell Linux as a
development environment to potential converts.