Re: Would it be possible that gtk implementation in C++

Thanks for all of the replies. I learnd a lot from it.

Compare to many people here, I am freshman in GTK/GTKmm. I make this proposal just because sometimes I miss 
the day when I am using QT/Android/HTML5.

Now I will put these toolkits into the fields they athlete at. Each of them could be great, in diffinerent 
situation, different goal, even in different philosophy.

Thanks again, I will continue learning GTK/GTKmm.

Sent from MEIZU MX

-------- Original Message --------
From:Paul Davis <paul linuxaudiosystems com>
Time:Fri 8/8 22:47
To:黄羽众 <ihyzi 163 com>
Cc:Florian Pelz <pelzflorian googlemail com>,gtk-list gnome org
Subject:Re: Would it be possible that gtk implementation in C++

On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:06 PM, 黄羽众 <ihyzi 163 com> wrote:

Thank you for point out predecessors' question!

I read the question and get some points, but I thinks the situtations
change a lot and I am not ask the same question.

1. I am not ask for why GTK choose to implement in C, I know it have some
historical reason. I want to make a proposal that gtk could be re-written
with c++ just as GCC does. I want to discuss with you whether it is a good

yet somehow you missed the most critical reason. historically, perhaps, one
could consider that things like pygtk did not exist. currently they do.
creating such bindings with the core implementation in C++ is challenging.
thus the sort of move you are suggesting would make the continued support
of languages like python more difficult.

in addition, you seem concerned about app developers, but app developers do
not (as a rule) develop Gtk+. They develop their own apps, and they are
free to use gtkmm, just as I've done with Ardour for the last 12 years. Do
I care that "in fact" Gtk+ is implemented in C? Well, yes, a bit but that
is mostly because I have a very demanding application and portability goals
that force me to occasionally work on Gtk+ itself. If I were writing a
simpler application (and other than a modern web browser or a kernel,
almost all apps are simpler than Ardour :), gtkmm would be entirely
adequate and as an app developer, I would be using a C++ GUI toolkit. And
if I wanted to write my own new widgets, I could, and do it much more
easily than in C. You say:

. Although there are gtkmm available, but gtkmm didn't gain enough
official support and recommend as GTK, and much fewer reference, help,
support available. The official recommand is gtk in c rather than gtkmm in
c++, so many devlopers read some tutorials and feel threatened and leave.
What's worse, gtkmm didn't wrapper all of the gtk featurese. In some
complex cases, developers have to use the low level gobj pointer to get
things done.

ALthough the final point is true, it isn't common. As for documentation and
the rest, I've always found that once I made the decision to use gtkmm,
what existed was adequate (support, tutorials, etc).

Now is in 2014, It can't be more normal to develop GUI application with
OOP style. I think it's time to change.

If you're really so concerned with it being 2014, I'm not sure why you're
considering using Gtk+ at all. I don't have an alternative to suggest, but
it is a remarkably dated GUI toolkit in many ways. Not all though.

GTK could be rewritten in C++,

But will not be. Find something more productive to put your energy into.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]