Re: future of development for the desktop (C++ vs C)

[Sergei Steshenko <sergstesh yahoo com>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: Marshall Lake <mlake mlake net>
> To: gtk-list gnome org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 4:26 PM
> Subject: Re: future of development for the desktop (C++ vs C)
> 
> 
>>  Is gtk+ 3.*.* now faster than the latest gtk+-2.*.* ?
>> 
>>  If not, since even gtk+-2.*.* is slower than Qt, gtk+ loses.
>>  ...
>>  Here is another thread: 
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1887070/what-should-i-choose-gtk-or-qt .
>> 
>>  FWIW, Qt now also is LGPL.
> 
> I wouldn't mind giving Qt a trial but I don't do C++.  I only use C.  
> Can 
> I use Qt with C ?
> 
> Are there any toolkits besides GTK which can be used with C ?
> 
> -- 
> Marshall Lake -- mlake mlake net -- http://www.mlake.net


You can write wrappers in "C" around C++ - unless what you need to do equates to making an instance of C++ template. But you'll need to understand some basic things about C++ - constructor, destructor, "placement new".

Regarding the latter - start from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placement_new .

If you implement "C" wrappers, you'll have an additional function call overhead.

I am no promoter of C++, but gtk+ is ridiculous with its reinvented object model.

...

I suggest to read this: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/programming-9/why-c-is-still-out-there-946286/ recent thread. Hopefully you will understand why a "C" toolkit ultimately can/should be slower than an equivalent C++ one.

...

I am no C++ programmer, I code mostly in Perl/C/GNU Octave, but I'm trying to objectively see in what C++ is better than "C", and I still consider C++ to be a very convoluted language. But, alas, feature-wise it wins over "C".

Regards,
  Sergei.