Am 29.11.2011, 09:26 Uhr, schrieb Gour <g...@atmarama.net>:
On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:16:09 +0100
"Marco Leise" <marco.le...@gmx.de> wrote:
Take a look at Code::Blocks for an example. I think it is one of the
most sophisticated applications written with wxWidgets. I used to
have trouble with the XML GUI definitions though. Somehow they took
ages for me to load and generate the UI on Linux, but not on Windows.
That's strange and it is the first time I heard something like that.
Two days ago I also asked on wxWidgets list if using XRC is kind of
idiomatic within wxWidgets community and Vadim Zeitlin (one of the core
devs) replied:
"Personally I've never really understood the appeal of compiling into
code
and whenever I use XRC I load it during run-time. Perhaps you can gain
some
minor performance advantage from compiling it into code (although I don't
know if anybody has ever really measured this) but using XRC is much more
flexible as you can tweak it without recompiling/rebuilding and often
even
without restarting the program so I'd definitely recommend using it as
is,
at least in the beginning."
So I am biased slightly against wx with XML or XRC or what they are
called.
I'd say your experience is probably not the accurate representation. Was
your problem with slow loading when using C++ or wxD?
Sincerely,
Gour
Precisely this: http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,13660.0.html
And debugging this lead me to the line where the XRC is parsed. It may
after all have been an issue with my system / the xml library / gtk /
compiz / etc... The experience just left a bad taste for me.
