On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:08:47 -0700 Michael Torrie <torriem gmail com> wrote: > I've used it and it's as close to native as you can get without > actually using Cocoa and Objective C. I am sure Qt experts on the Qt > forums and mailing lists can answer your questions better than anyone > on this list. And it's not as alien as Lothar makes it out to be. If > you program in behaviors correctly and make your app function as a > Mac user expects, end users (average users) will not be able to tell > it's a Qt app. Thank you. I'm told that one part of the specs is that app should look good on Mac OS X, but not having one is difficult to understand how each toolkit fulfills it. > Absolutely not. wxWidgets is good, but Qt is much more advanced than > wxWidgets from a programmer's point of view. Does wxWidgets do more in regard to the 'behaviour's mentioned above? > Whether you use GTK or Qt, I see no reason to avoid C++. I can > understand reluctance to build in C (there is Vala of course). Python > is a good choice. I'd like to avoid pointer debugging and have statically compiled language. > If you do want to build a project that is open source and actually > could have some community behind it, D is probably not the best > language to pick. Heh, that may be true today, but let's hope it will be better tomorrow. Sincerely, Gour -- The senses are so strong and impetuous, O Arjuna, that they forcibly carry away the mind even of a man of discrimination who is endeavoring to control them. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature