Re: ANNOUNCE: cluttermm 0.5.1. hello world here

[Charles McLachlan <cim20 metropolis-data co uk>]

On Wed, 7 May 2008, Ionutz Borcoman wrote:

> I, for one, been oscillating between using GTKmm and QT4 for my next pet
> project.
>
> After playing with both QT4 and GTKmm for more than a month, I've decided to
> use QT4. Maybe try again using GTK/GTKmm in a year.

(I don't want to start a flame war (honest) but feel that my 
experience with Qt (and my subsequent conversion to Gtkmm) might serve as 
a warning to those who might be thinking of turning to the darkside.)

I've looked in my crystal ball and predict that after a year of using QT 
you'll welcome back gtkmm with open arms.

Our company used to use Qt until we all became totally fed up to the back 
teeth of its weird inconsistances, loony signal/slot mechanisms, and 
staggeringly poor designer. In comparison, gtkmm is a breeze.

> Right now, I find the documentation lacking in key areas (for example,
> drag&drop in a tree) and I'm tired of waiting for an answer on a mailing
> list, answer that might never come, and not in the mood of hacking GTK&GTKmm
> sources.

If its support you want, you'll not have any luck with Qt either. The Qt 
mailing lists are the same as the Gtkmm ones, if your problem is 
interesting, you'll get an answer. Don't be fooled that just because 
people pay for Qt and there is a proper company behind it, that you're 
going to get any sort of help.

And yes, you *will* have to resort to hacking the Qt code once you've 
exhausted all the othe possibilities, and as someone who has done both: 
hacking Gtkmm is millions of times easier than hacking Qt.

So by all means give Qt a go, but don't be surprised if you learn (like I 
did) that gtkmm beats it into a cocked hat on almost all fronts.

Charlie - Metropolis Data Consultants - 07976 028167 - 01223 763758