Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another GTK+ 3.0 Pre-Release Arrives

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic Another GTK+ 3.0 Pre-Release Arrives

    Another GTK+ 3.0 Pre-Release Arrives

    Phoronix: Another GTK+ 3.0 Pre-Release Arrives

    Just about one month ago there was the first GTK+ 3.0 test release and then before May ended out there was another development release and it delivered on X Input 2.0 support for GTK. Just days later, another new GTK+ 3.0 test release has been tagged...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODMyOQ

  • Remco
    replied
    Originally posted by srg_13 View Post
    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...
    You'll probably want to use Builder, that's even easier (in Vala for bonus points):
    Code:
    using Gtk;
    
    int main(string[] args) {     
        Gtk.init(ref args);
    
        try {
            var builder = new Builder();
            builder.add_from_file("hello.ui");
            builder.connect_signals(null);
            Gtk.main();
        } catch(Error e) { return 1; } 
    
        return 0;
    }

    Compile with: valac --pkg gtk+-2.0 hello.vala

    Now you can design your GUI in the Glade editor.

    Leave a comment:


  • srg_13
    replied
    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...

    Leave a comment:


  • hax0r
    replied
    It is ridiculous that to this day GTK has no consistent theme (and what RealNC said) between different environments.

    Leave a comment:


  • RealNC
    replied
    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."

    Leave a comment:


  • mat69
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • val-gaav
    replied
    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...

    Leave a comment:


  • Delgarde
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • pingufunkybeat
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • pingufunkybeat
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X