Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GTK 4.0 Toolkit Officially Released

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Anarchy
    Senior Member

  • Anarchy
    replied
    Originally posted by calc View Post

    That's exactly what it looks like, without Red Hat and Canonical it would likely die.

    The long decline after 2010 until the uptick in 2018 also marks when Ubuntu had stopped using Gnome and switched to Unity with 11.04 until they switched to Gnome 3 with 17.10.
    It does make me question the future of native applications on Linux, though. It takes a single manager to fire a few people, or they can leave by themselves, to derail the entire development and support of gtk/gnome. For the time being, red hat seems confident in Linux as an enterprise "desktop platform", but the way they've been moving toward Linux on the server and the cloud, I wonder if the end of gtk/gnome is near.

    Leave a comment:

  • kpedersen
    Senior Member

  • kpedersen
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    no language will help with that. right use of c++ will make writing correct multithreaded programs much easier.
    Following on from this, C and C++ also has vastly many more thread debugging tools than other languages. Even just the ones from Intel are more than many other language communities combined!

    So yeah, we will make mistakes but at least we can track them down and fix them within reasonable time.

    Leave a comment:

  • pal666
    Senior Member

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by wizard69 View Post
    My problem with C++ is that the standards group seems to be hell bent on making C++ into an unreadable mess
    standards group has to evolve language while keeping backwards compatibility. clueless commenters just have to cry and demand pony.
    Originally posted by wizard69 View Post
    for GUI development what the world needs is a better Python.
    certainly for any serious development world needs at least something statically typed, i.e. python is last thing you'd think

    Leave a comment:

  • pal666
    Senior Member

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by andreano View Post
    The compiler is allowed to silently delete your code instead of failing
    that's what optimizers do(delete your code instead of failing). if you want unoptimized code, don't turn on optimizations. but better pass c++ programs to your c++ compiler(c++ program has no ubs by definition)

    Leave a comment:

  • mdedetrich
    Senior Member

  • mdedetrich
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    the matter of fact is, providing abi is much simpler task than writing application itself, i.e. you are optimizing for wrong metric. but hey, it's expected from rust zealots
    Not for a GUI library its not (at least if you don't want the API to be retarded).

    In any case, this has nothing to do with Rust zeolots. As pointed out elsewhere, Rust is picking up steam in Gnome and is also being considered in the Linux kernel (main issue here isn't the language but rather getting rustc to work with Linux's build system).

    Leave a comment:

  • pal666
    Senior Member

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by oleid View Post
    Anyway, huge pain points in GUI toolkits is multi threading. C++ won't help here. Sure, there are mutexes, however, the language won't help you to make sure everything is threadsafe.
    no language will help with that. right use of c++ will make writing correct multithreaded programs much easier.
    Originally posted by oleid View Post
    I recall multithreading being a huge PITA in Qt.
    qt is bad example of c++ library, i don't even consider it c++

    Leave a comment:

  • pal666
    Senior Member

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by zxy_thf View Post
    The ABI problem is not only about the breakages, but also the incompatibilities.
    One can compile a C library with GCC and link it with Clang, or vise versa, but this won't work for C++.
    it will work with c++ because they use same itanium abi. what won't work is mixing of different standard libraries for example, but it will not work with c libraries too

    Leave a comment:

  • kpedersen
    Senior Member

  • kpedersen
    replied
    Originally posted by 144Hz View Post
    kpedersen
    Senior Member
    kpedersen It’s GTK these days. The + was removed some time ago.
    I could simply have been referring to Gtk+2. Outside of toy desktop environments that is still vastly the most popular. Version 3 took too long to correctly support other platforms so it missed the window for a number of our projects.

    Originally posted by 144Hz View Post
    [USER="68985"]
    Of course Debian’s GNOME team is super fast but as a general rule your mind processing shouldn’t be slower than Debian packaging..
    Nah, they are really just inconsistent (like most things in Linux). Check out part of the rust bindings here:
    https://packages.debian.org/buster/librust-gtk+dox-dev
    https://packages.debian.org/buster/librust-gtk-dev

    "Rust Bindings for the GTK+ 3 library"

    I don't care about "modern" names at all. Consistency is more important to me. I think that is generally agreed upon by many projects (https://openports.se/x11/gtk+4). It will probably remain Gtk+ long after Gtk actually becomes obsolete and replaced with another software.
    kpedersen
    Senior Member
    Last edited by kpedersen; 17 December 2020, 08:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • pal666
    Senior Member

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post
    If you consider name mangling as part of the ABI (which you reasonably should) then it does break very often.
    first, mangling is not part of c++, i.e. imbeciles can't say "c++ breaks abi" in this case, they can only say "gcc breaks abi" for example. second, it doesn't break very often
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post
    The matter of fact is, C++ is much more complex than C which makes it harder to provide a reasonably stable ABI (in practical terms).
    the matter of fact is, providing abi is much simpler task than writing application itself, i.e. you are optimizing for wrong metric. but hey, it's expected from rust zealots

    Leave a comment:

  • pal666
    Senior Member

  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by zxy_thf View Post
    Well I just realized this will not be a problem for an elitism community
    he is from imbecilic community rather than elitist one

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X