Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another GTK+ 3.0 Pre-Release Arrives

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by val-gaav View Post
    The point was made for a total re write of GTK+ toolkit... If it would get this the new version would be_incompatible_with_all_the_software anyway. Apps would have to be ported...

    Since it is like that why not port to Qt4 a toolkit that is there and is way modern/has more features then GTK+ ?

    Ugliness on the other hand is a thing of preference and any toolkit can look right with a good theme...

    This is all about technology beneath the hood ... and Linux would certainly benefit if it had one toolkit instead of two incompatible ones...
    Sorry but that is a myth. None said there would be a _total_ rewrite. Yeah binary compatibility and API will be broken at _some_ areas yet not at all. That would make no sense.
    The idea of such changes is to remove old cruft, add new stuff where it was not possible before. As well to rearange stuff if it turned out to be far from ideal.

    Same was true for KDE 4.0.

    Yeah I'd like it if Gnome was written in Qt, yet that is just an illusion that won't come true. It would just take too much work for gains that would not justify that. Plain simple: Gnome works pretty well with GTK+ already so rather improve GTK+ than to start over.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by bugmenot2 View Post
      GTK needs to improve dramatically to catch up to the innovations of the toolkits in Windows and OSX.

      This is highlighted with the simple "Hello World" test where you count the number of lines of code to create a simple Hello World. In GTK it is more than 10 lines or so and in other toolkits it is usually under 4 - 5 lines of code.
      I have to agree here. This is the reason I use typewriters whenever possible. They produce a "Hello World" in just one line of code and are thus far superior to all that new-fashioned compjooter stuff.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by mirv View Post
        I personally like using fox, although naturally that, like qt, is for C++. One thing that gtk has is working entirely with C. Just wanted to point that out.
        What?

        GTK supports lots of languages. I have programmed a couple different GTK python apps for different things.

        If your going to go on about OO and C vs C++... 1989 called and wants their pointless language debates back.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by val-gaav View Post
          The point was made for a total re write of GTK+ toolkit... If it would get this the new version would be_incompatible_with_all_the_software anyway. Apps would have to be ported...

          Since it is like that why not port to Qt4 a toolkit that is there and is way modern/has more features then GTK+ ?
          Apps *don't* need to be ported to Gtk+ 3.x, as long as they're already coded to "best practices" for Gtk+ 2.x - i.e not using any of the deprecated API that's being removed, not accessing 'private' data directly, etc. As far as I can tell, well-written code should be compilable against either version.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by mat69 View Post
            Sorry but that is a myth. None said there would be a _total_ rewrite. Yeah binary compatibility and API will be broken at _some_ areas yet not at all. That would make no sense.
            The idea of such changes is to remove old cruft, add new stuff where it was not possible before. As well to rearange stuff if it turned out to be far from ideal.

            Same was true for KDE 4.0.

            Yeah I'd like it if Gnome was written in Qt, yet that is just an illusion that won't come true. It would just take too much work for gains that would not justify that. Plain simple: Gnome works pretty well with GTK+ already so rather improve GTK+ than to start over.

            GTK 3.x breaks ABI/API; slightly. It got rid of a bunch of old crusty features that turned out to not be popular and is introduced new frameworks to replace them. (Ie. Dbus for Corba)

            But distributions can still maintain compatibility with older applications as long as they want without to much effort.


            And, btw, the KDE 3.5.x transition to KDE 4.0 is the posterboy for what not to do. It's one of the best things that ever happened to Gnome, in terms of aiding in it's popularity.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by drag View Post
              What?

              GTK supports lots of languages. I have programmed a couple different GTK python apps for different things.

              If your going to go on about OO and C vs C++... 1989 called and wants their pointless language debates back.
              I think you missed his point. He didn't say Gtk didn't work with lots of languages - he said it *did* work with C. Which Qt doesn't, kind of a problem if you like coding in C.

              (Personally, I prefer almost anything *but* C or C++, but that's just my opinion).

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by drag View Post
                What?

                GTK supports lots of languages. I have programmed a couple different GTK python apps for different things.

                If your going to go on about OO and C vs C++... 1989 called and wants their pointless language debates back.
                Sorry if there was some confusion - I meant only that if someone is programming in C, and only C, they can't really use q4, fox, wxWidgets, etc etc etc.
                And no, definitely not going to go on about C vs C++ or anything OO - each have their place. Even assembly does (especially in embedded environments). Right tools for the right job and all that.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by drag View Post
                  And, btw, the KDE 3.5.x transition to KDE 4.0 is the posterboy for what not to do. It's one of the best things that ever happened to Gnome, in terms of aiding in it's popularity.
                  I'm not sure about that.

                  KDE moved from a 10-year-old system and engineered something completely new and suitable for a modern desktop.

                  GNOME still has to make that step. While the KDE 4 transition was far from smooth for many, it is rock solid right now, and the fun is only beginning in the GNOME camp.

                  You might see many migrations in the other direction.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    What I'm saying is that there was lots more in KDE4 than porting to Qt4, which was pretty straight-forward.

                    All of these things still have to appear in GNOME 3.0.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by drag View Post
                      GTK 3.x breaks ABI/API; slightly. It got rid of a bunch of old crusty features that turned out to not be popular and is introduced new frameworks to replace them. (Ie. Dbus for Corba)
                      A couple of corrections - *Gtk* didn't replace CORBA with DBus, since Gtk itself has nothing to do with either of them. That's Gnome 3.x you're thinking of...

                      Second, it's not that they're getting rid of features because they turned out not to be popular - they're getting rid of features because they turned out in to be the wrong way to do things. In many cases those features were widely used - they've just been made obsolete over time.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
                        Apps *don't* need to be ported to Gtk+ 3.x, as long as they're already coded to "best practices" for Gtk+ 2.x - i.e not using any of the deprecated API that's being removed, not accessing 'private' data directly, etc. As far as I can tell, well-written code should be compilable against either version.
                        I do know that ... I've commented about a hyphotetical total rewrite of Gtk+ toolkit not about the state of 3.0 which more or less is just a number bump with some cleaning up and no major new features/changes...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by drag View Post
                          And, btw, the KDE 3.5.x transition to KDE 4.0 is the posterboy for what not to do. It's one of the best things that ever happened to Gnome, in terms of aiding in it's popularity.
                          I agree partially even if I did not see it that way at first. Imo the only reason KDE 4.0 -- and some of the following releases -- was bad was the suckyness of Plasma. No offense but of what use are some fancy widgets if the desktop crashes constantly or if you can't use your desktop (lack of features).
                          Most of the ported applications at that point worked pretty nice, with some bad exceptions in fact.

                          In that regard I like the way the Gnomies handle it more, add it when it is useable some way.

                          So in hindsight it might have been better to create Plasma but not use it at first, though who knows maybe nothing would have changed then.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            The best choice for a developer right now is to write his apps in Qt. Because that way, the app can be made to integrate perfectly (including "Gnome Human Interface Guidelines" in both Gnome/XFCE/any-other-Gtk-DE as well as KDE (and OS X/Windows, if that's wanted.) It will look and behave perfect everywhere.

                            Writing the app with Gtk will result in integration with Gnome/etc, but will look like ass on KDE. Because of this, I don't see why anyone would choose Gtk for other reasons that just "me teh l33t 1 luvz Gtk, Qt sux0rz."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              It is ridiculous that to this day GTK has no consistent theme (and what RealNC said) between different environments.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by bugmenot2 View Post
                                GTK needs to improve dramatically to catch up to the innovations of the toolkits in Windows and OSX.

                                This is highlighted with the simple "Hello World" test where you count the number of lines of code to create a simple Hello World. In GTK it is more than 10 lines or so and in other toolkits it is usually under 4 - 5 lines of code.
                                Ummm... I think you're wrong about Windows... Have you seen Hello World in Win32? It's not easy!

                                And then there's MFC - http://pastebin.com/xmUgiKvr - 94 lines.

                                It's a little easier in the crippled .Net languages, but only because the visual designer creates all of the UI code for you...

                                In Gtkmm (the C++ port - I'm not familiar with the C API), on the other hand;
                                Code:
                                #include <gtkmm.h>
                                
                                int main(int argc, char * argv[])
                                {
                                    Gtk::Main kit(argc, argv);
                                
                                    Gtk::Window win;
                                    Gtk::Label hello("Hello World!");
                                
                                    win.add(hello);
                                
                                    win.show_all();
                                
                                    Gtk::Main::Run(win);
                                
                                    return 0;
                                }
                                Not hard... In my opinion it's actually better to develop for Windows with Gtkmm than the Windows APIs themselves...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X