GTK Scene Kit Merged For GTK4

[phoronix]

Phoronix: GTK Scene Kit Merged For GTK4

The GTK+ Scene Graph Kit (GSK) has landed in mainline GTK+ Git as the "spiritual successor to Clutter" and now providing a scene graph for this GNOME toolkit...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=GTK-Scene-Kit-Lands

[tessio]

Now get rid of Cairo, gtk!

[FireBurn]

I notice there was a warning that gtk-4 will require a C99 subset - not sure why they don't go the whole hog and require C11 since they're making a clean brake with version 4

[SpyroRyder]

I notice there was a warning that gtk-4 will require a C99 subset - not sure why they don't go the whole hog and require C11 since they're making a clean brake with version 4

They do still have a good 2 years before they are going to releases GTK4 as properly stable but it may also require a bigger rewrite than they have hands for at the moment. Rome wasn't built in a day as the saying goes.

[newwen]

Now get rid of Cairo, gtk!

What's wrong with cairo? I think it's a pretty decent drawing library.

[uid313]

Maybe should rewrite in C++ instead of C to take advantage of OO?

Having to do gtk_window_frame_button() is much uglier than Gtk.Window.Framebutton();

[rastersoft]

Maybe should rewrite in C++ instead of C to take advantage of OO?

Having to do gtk_window_frame_button() is much uglier than Gtk.Window.Framebutton();

Just rename all functions to GtkWindowFramebutton style :P

[Cape]

Just rename all functions to GtkWindowFramebutton style :P

Legit.

Thread closed.

[ebassi]

I notice there was a warning that gtk-4 will require a C99 subset - not sure why they don't go the whole hog and require C11 since they're making a clean brake with version 4

Because we're still trying to support compilation with MSVC, on Windows, and MSVC only supports that subset of C99 (mostly the whole thing, except variable-length arrays).

We're also limited by ABI compatibility constraints in GLib for _Bool, so we cannot really use that.

Most of the features C11 provides — atomic operations, static assertions — are already provided by GLib, so we don't really care about them.

[ebassi]

Maybe should rewrite in C++ instead of C to take advantage of OO?

Then we'd have to write a C layer so that language bindings could be written on top of it. We'd also need to rewrite hundreds of thousands of lines of code just to use a worse language that just happens to have some OO syntactic language on top of all the pitfalls of C.