Re: [Fwd: Re: Comparison of Qt to gtkmm]

[Bob Caryl <bob fis-cal com>]

Hehe.. I didn't have to sell it.. I was the *buyer*... LOL

Bob

Jonathon Jongsma wrote:

> On 1/24/06, Bob Caryl <bob fis-cal com> wrote:
>  
>
> > Oops!  I guess I should have read that page first!  :(
> >
> >    
>
> Ha :)
>
> I noticed that too when I googled in response to this request.  One
> thing that I did find quite interesting was this discussion on a QT
> mailing list debating the merits of some of the design choices in QT:
> http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/2002-08/thread00000-0.html
>
> Granted, some of this stuff is probably pretty dated, though I think
> the big debate about signals from that thread is still valid.   Having
> recently run into some preprocessor abuse and global namespace
> pollution with XLib, I'm happy that gtkmm doesn't use the preprocessor
> to try to extend the language the way QT seems to.  But to be fair,  I
> haven't used QT, so I can't make any judgements about it from personal
> experience.  I started using gtkmm about a year or so ago, and I found
> it a really well-designed toolkit, and it just feels natural for the
> most part.  Most things I've read since then seem to validate that
> decision, but you'll probably need something more substantial and
> objective than that if you're trying to sell it at your workplace.
>
>  

begin:vcard
fn:Robert Caryl
n:Caryl;Robert
org:Fiscal Systems, Inc.
adr:;;102 Commerce Circle;Madison;AL;35758;USA
email;internet:bob fis-cal com
title:Senior Software Design Engineer
tel;work:356-772-8920 X108
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.fis-cal.com
version:2.1
end:vcard