Re: gtkmm capabilities

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 14:17 +0100, Roel Vanhout wrote:
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > Please do file bugs if you think that there's something missing in the
> > gtkmm documentation.
> 
> I cannot point to exact locations and say 'this or that function isn't 
> documented'.

But that's what you mention later, so please do remember to file bugs
when that's what you find.

>  It's more about the whole 'experience' (lame word). Now, 
> MSDN isn't all that, but take for example the documentation for a call I 
> just needed 10 minutes ago: CWinApp::GetProfileInt(). Apart from the 
> fact that MSDN has a nice application that I can use to search through 
> documentation and bookmark etc,

I use google for the gtkmm documentation. devhelp is also very good.

>  have a look at the webpage:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vclib/html/_mfc_cwinapp.3a3a.getprofileint.asp
> It has a full explanation of all parameters, the return value,

Most gtkmm methods have the same documentation.

>  pitfalls 
> to watch out for,

There are not so many pitfalls with gtkmm compared to MFC. Sorry about
that.

>  information on how it behaves on different platforms, 
> and a short example, on the page, that shows how to use it. The amount 
> of works that goes into documentation like that is out of reach for FOSS 
> developers

It's not out of reach, but you do need to say what you want in order for
someone to give you what you want.

>  (I'll be the first to admit that), but it would certainly 
> make developing for Linux nicer.
> This is not a complaint, and I do appreciate all the work that thousands 
> of people worldwide put in all the great FOSS software that I use and 
> develop with, it is just an observation. And this observation combined 
> with the fact that in the commercial world, developer time is very 
> expensive, leads me to conclude that 3000$ is not a lot of money for Qt.
> 
> > If anybody wants to pay $3000 for a few days of training, I and many
> > others would be happy to help.
> 
> Again, this is the difference between hobby and commercial projects.

Companies often pay for training with proprietary software (and are
often forced to because the documentation of proprietary software is
usually so bad.)

I don't understand what the difference is. Training happens for both
proprietary and non-proprietary softare.

>  If 
> I were to write commercial software with gtkmm I would convince my 
> company to pony up for training. But I won't pay for it from my own 
> money for hobby software.
> BTW, I do think there would be a market for a (small) company that would 
> provide commercial support and training for gtkmm (but only if the 
> Windows version would be up to par with the X version).

Again, what bugs exactly (in a separate email thread please)? I don't
doubt that there are some, but you must call attention to them if you
want them to be fixed.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com