Le samedi 17 janvier 2009 22:21:18 Thorsten Behrens, vous avez écrit : > Éric Bischoff wrote: > > Recoding for qt, gtk, win32, and Cocoa is a serious duplication of > > efforts. > > > > If the purpose for having an abstract layer and porting on so many APIs > > is PORTABILITY to many operating systems, then this duplication of > > efforts becomes useless, because Qt is already very portable. > > > > If the reason for this effort is strategic INDEPENDANCY towards one > > library provider, then yes it makes a lot of sense to have abstraction > > layers in the middle.
Hi Thorsten, > definitely the latter, not in the sense of mistrust against the > provider, but knowing the fundamental law that only one thing is > constant - that things are changing. (...) Yes, that's why I said that the strategic independancy made a lot of sense. > And btw, qt and vcl are actually quite similar in their core design, > and thus share the same weaknesses, conceptually - they don't use > native widgets, but only native look (which is noticeable even > today, if you look closely, and is surely not becoming less of a > problem, c.f. Apple's deprecation plans...). Yes, I presented Qt as a replacement for VCL because they really work on the same level. There's a huge difference between VCL and Qt though: while Qt is company- supported and has a huge user base, VCL is developed and maintained by OpenOffice.org only. Replacing VCL with Qt would have been a way to "externalize" maintenance efforts. And it's not only VCL that has to be maintained, but also all the platform-specific plugins (Windows, Cocoa, etc.) > (...) -- Writing about music is like dancing about architecture -- Elvis Costello --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
