Re: so, is this claim about pango still true? or does nobody actually care?

[Clemens Eisserer <linuxhippy gmail com>]

Hello,

> So far I've only been using Sysprof:
>
>         http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-07.html#26
>
>   Federico

Its really great to actually see something happen, since also on my
more or less modern system GTK2 based gui programs feel much slower
than compareble widget sets like QT3/4 or Fox-Toolkit based programs.
Its really great at least a normal discussion seems to be accepted,
any time anybody said something about GTK2's performance he was more
or less banned with "GTK2 isn't slow" or the claim that its slowness
is the price for all the new features.

I do not think a P100 should be taken as a serious benchmarking
machine anymore, however a P2-350 or a P3-500 should be able to handle
what a widget set does withough showing any kind of slugishness. When
using GTK2 based programs on my P3-800 everything feels really slow,
window-resizes take a long time till the whole gui is redrawn and
layouted and expose-events sent by X are only done slowly although I
have a RENDER-accerlating graphic card and even on my P4/2.2ghz
Eclipse has performance problems which it does not have when using the
Fox-Toolkit as basis.

Furthermore I think the new functionality is no excuse for GTK2's
slowness, QT is as powerful in most areas (thats not a better/worse
comparison, I just think both toolkits can be compared from their
functionality) and does not have that problems - it got a bit slower
when 3.0 was release because of all the fancy themening stuff but
thats it.

However from the functionality point of view GTK2 is great, would be
great if developers would also keep an eye on performance for future
developments.

Thanks, lg Clemens