On Sunday, 09 September 2007, at 17:40:57 (-0400), Youness Alaoui wrote: > I've been 'bought' by the EWL developers early when I started > looking at EFL. I heard that EWL is more stable, more maintained, > better in performance, etc... so I chose EWL.
EWL might be considered more "active." A simple count of recent CVS commit e-mails is enough to show that. But "more maintained" isn't really a valid concept. > Then I was approached by the ETK developers and I was also 'bought' > by them into using ETK. saying that ETK is more stable, more > maintained and the performance is also very good (not better than > EWL but the difference for a 'normal' application (not using > thousands of widgets at once) is not noticeable). EWL has better performance, period. Just because the human eye/brain cannot perceive the difference in certain circumstances doesn't invalidate it, any more than an imperceptable difference in execution time between a single bubble sort and a single quicksort makes them equally efficient. > I see some kind of war between EWL and ETK. Both are toolkits for > EFL, both are good, both are maintained, etc.. and each group says > the same thing against the other, but I personally think that both > of them are equivalent. They are equivalent only in the same respects that Gtk+ and Qt are equivalent (both are widget sets with much the same end-user functionality), plus one more: both use EFL. Beyond that, they are not at all equivalent. > I think that this war should cease, because the users of EFL are > lost when it comes to choosing one of the two toolkits, and there is > nothing official stating which one is to be used. Nor will there be. raster has made that clear. Picking EWL or Etk is really not all that different from picking Gtk+ or Qt or XFCE or Motif or Tk or Xaw/Xt. What suits your needs best? If you don't know the answer, do your homework, and/or try as many as you can. But don't ask someone else to make your decisions for you. If that's what you want, you're on the wrong project. > I think that a wiki page saying something along the lines of : > - If your application aims to do this and that, then use EWL > - If your application aims to do that and this, then use ETK > (showing the pros and cons of each toolkit, and saying which one is > best suited for your application depending on the use you want it to > have, etc...) As you yourself pointed out, there is much disagreement between the toolkit authors on those very same pros and cons, so how do you expect a wiki page to resolve the dilemma? > Right now, I'm working with ETK *ONLY* because cmarcelo is writing > ETK bindings for python and I need to work with python, and I don't > want to start writing the bindings for EWL from scratch without any > help. Did you ask for any? > Can we please finally have an official, objective answer on this > very important matter, without partiality and without people > trolling one toolkit with false arguments only for the sake of > convincing us to choose their own toolkit. Nope. Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Linux Server/Cluster Admin, LBL.gov Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "I remember the time I knew what happiness was. Let the memory live again." -- "Memory", from /Cats/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
