On 6/5/08, Jean-Yves Lefort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sure, both systems need some reflection capabilities, which neither C > nor C++ support natively. I don't see how this point would debunk the > fact that C++ is a more expressive language than C, and that writing > an object-oriented application in C++ is generally easier and more > pleasant than writing it in C. > > I know that C++ has its share of issues, and I do understand why in > the nineties, the GLib people decided to use C and not C++. I actually > agree with their decision. Yet, if some people claim that "Qt is > superior because it chose C++", trying to disprove them with the above > argument is like trying to oppose general relativity with "because my > aunt Lilly likes to drink tea".
I'm not familiar with Qt, I only repeat what I've heard; Qt is superior because it renders faster. Planing to solve the issues in GTK+ that will improve performance is useful, advocating C++ is not. I doubt 3.0 will be in C++, 4.0, and possibly any other release. Can we focus on productive discussions? Best regards. P.S. Me, and many developers hate C++ with passion, if a toolkit requires C++, it's cutting a huge user-base. -- Felipe Contreras _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
