Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Enlightenment's EFL Continues Dominating In The Embedded Space

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

  • caligula
    replied
    Originally posted by Hi-Angel View Post
    To me it sounds more like a functional than OO. It's a shame though that C still didn't have ADTs.

    P.S. hmm, sorry if something go wrong, that post have actually embedded quotes, but for some reason I didn't see them in the preview
    You can emulate functional data structures with structs, typedefs, unions, and macros - to some extent, but it's a shame the C developers can't see the value in tagged unions. Shouldn't be too hard, but they'd have to pair it with pattern matching and all these would eventually lead to a pile of crap. ML style language provide a lot better starting point for this kind of stuff. OCaml isn't that bad if you like C.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hi-Angel
    replied
    Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
    Originally posted by raster
    oh so is the linux kernel - oo is done with structs and function pointers.
    yes
    To me it sounds more like a functional than OO. It's a shame though that C still didn't have ADTs.

    P.S. hmm, sorry if something go wrong, that post have actually embedded quotes, but for some reason I didn't see them in the preview

    Leave a comment:


  • c117152
    replied
    Originally posted by mcirsta View Post
    I haven't used EFL but I have tried GTK ( hated it ) and Qt5 ( liked it but had mixed feeling about QML ).
    If I had to choose I'd just go with Qt5 because I know it and it trust it.
    Qt has better tools and docs. But it really sucks when you actually need to debug something since the stacks are practically untraceable and got help you if you're allocating to the heap. GTK is a little better in those regards, but it's a very rigid toolbox. The moment you go customizing you're dead.

    EFL has everything and anything in-between with a stack you can follow. Unfortunately, a quick glance over the key-binding functions of stuff like Terminology shows just how much all those atomics cost in LoC. You essentially end up needing to know the library top-to-bottom to be able to read other people's code... Which defeats the purpose of picking a C library over a C++ one as far as most people are concerned.

    Overall, They all suck. The fact that web programming with EcmaScript horrors keeps taking the lead over GUI design really goes to show you just how horrible they really are.

    Leave a comment:


  • ozric
    replied
    Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
    Obligatory : https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/15001/enlightened

    Besides, I think that Qt pretty much is king in terms of market share for embedded UI toolkits.
    I've been programming since the late 70s, lots of paradigm shifts and languages over that time, usually requiring a lot of learning to grasp new ideas. Someone like this would never be considered for a position anywhere I was hiring. He screams out for anyone to hear, "I am an idiot who can't read documentation!" Just about every gripe he had was a complete inability to follow documentation, let alone even google for it.

    After reading that I experimented with EFL, it was not difficult to pick up at all. It would seem that schools spit out lots of 'programmers' who know a certain IDE or language, but are never taught how to actually write code. Oh, they can follow an example or two, copy and paste bits together here and there, but actually learn a new language or concept? Not so much.

    Basically all I got out of that article was that this guy can't easily learn a new API, gets frustrated and starts bitching about things that aren't even correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcirsta
    replied
    Originally posted by caligula View Post

    With all the toolkits out there, why would one want to pick EFL as a starting point?
    Because Samsung couldn't take Qt for cheap so they just got EFL. It's like asking why Ubuntu went with their own MIR, because Wayland wasn't theirs and they wanted their own thingy.
    Other then Tizen EFL and Enlightenment really have a low market share so Samsung is the only one pushing it.
    Qt on the other hand has a much broader support and say what you want about KDE but it's got market share for sure. I haven't used EFL but I have tried GTK ( hated it ) and Qt5 ( liked it but had mixed feeling about QML ).
    If I had to choose I'd just go with Qt5 because I know it and it trust it.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by kalrish View Post
    You, along with other well-known users, treat many like crap. Didn't your parents teach you manners? If they did, you should be ashamed of being such a failure; and, if they didn't, they were crap themselves. Choose and take a dose of your own medicine.
    Go away silly sophist, your trickery is ineffective on me.

    Leave a comment:


  • kalrish
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    If you don't think it's bad to have errors like that, you're an idiot.
    You, along with other well-known users, treat many like crap. Didn't your parents teach you manners? If they did, you should be ashamed of being such a failure; and, if they didn't, they were crap themselves. Choose and take a dose of your own medicine.

    Leave a comment:


  • doom_Oo7
    replied
    Originally posted by raster View Post
    well i guess gtk/gobject then is also nih c++
    yes

    Originally posted by raster View Post
    oh so is the linux kernel - oo is done with structs and function pointers.
    yes

    Leave a comment:


  • Ardje
    replied
    Originally posted by caligula View Post
    With all the toolkits out there, why would one want to pick EFL as a starting point?
    Of all the toolkits out there (EFL and QT, what else is there?), EFL can meet your target, whatever your target is. Low on memory? Or just low on power? Which also is the biggest downside of EFL, you have to compile for your target and make decisions, since there are no distributions which have a good selection of options.
    Next to that, the developers are extremely helpful, not just about EFL, but just design issues and problems in general.
    What would make my life complete is local efl=require"efl", as I have to jump through hoops to get a working multi video player using plain gstreamer. As a programmer I refuse to do C unless I have to create interfaces or hacking kernel.

    Leave a comment:


  • caligula
    replied
    Originally posted by Brane215 View Post

    Why ? All they have done is _offer_ their sources. Don like their stuff ? Fork your own version. And if you think it's appropriate, you could feel gratefull for open sauce that gave you starting point for doing so, a few "bitches" more or less.
    With all the toolkits out there, why would one want to pick EFL as a starting point?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X