Hi, [...] > Multi-Platform-Stuff: > Both GTK+ and Qt are available for X11, win32 and OSX! They work well on > those platforms, and are used by a large number of users. As far as I > know though, Qt is better "supported" on OSX and win32, that is, it > works "out of the box", while GTK+ does need a little tinkering. > Since I am lazy, and GTK+ does not provide ANYTHING that is so > significant that it makes it vastly superior to Qt, I would suggest the > lazy route, and go for Qt. This of course is only my opinion, there is > no need to argue against it, unless you can show me THE vastly superior > feature of GTK+ that I OVERLOOKED. (no License and evil Corporation > Talk, only technical!)
Gtk is more language independent. If you want people to contribute plugins with custom config widgets, forcing them into C++ is a bad idea. And having a C-API for plugins but with mandatory GUI code in C++ is questionable at least. If one would decide, that plugins only offer abstracted widget descriptions insteat of GUI code, my argument becomes invalid. But the possibilites will be severely limited. The video display capabilites (OpenGL, XVideo etc.) can be excluded from the toolkit discussion since it's IMO always better do do this with raw Xlib/GLX. Burkhard _______________________________________________ Cinelerra mailing list [email protected] https://init.linpro.no/mailman/skolelinux.no/listinfo/cinelerra
