Sorry for the confusion but obviously it reflects what I had in my head ;) It was also after a day of reading documentation online.. hope I am excused.
A short intro: I come from fortran/emacs(make it yourself stuff) and I decided to learn RAD[1] (Actually I wanted to learn RAiD[1]): i.e. use at best the work of others. I got fedora (which I usually trust: Not too fancy, not too strict). Fedora was: glade and anjuta. (kilos of KDE, Qt and the like. But at the time Qt was still struggling for public licence.). I wrote an application using anjuta and glade. I didn't had too much time to work on it. It used to be a part time stuff. Right now it is more interesting to me for personal reasons than official ones. Anyway here is a pic of the first result: http://www.scriptsforscience.com/projects/loom/loom_ss.jpg So I rephrase myself: >you mean libglade vs gtkbuilder ? go with gtkbuilder, this will allow you >to dynamically build your treeviews and cell renderers, and give you >generally more access to gtk+ api via the ui file than libglade did. >(libglade is pretty much deprecated by now and unmaintained anyway) With portability and stability I meant it within linux. I might have to be technical. What is the chance that (an old project): ./configure make will work for: the running linux distributions (least probem) over time (5 years?), any other linux distributions over some time span (It should work. What about a 5 years old distribtion?) and some GTK+ libs (Over some time)? I.e. If I write the application code and you write the UI code. Shall I rewrite the full code every 1 year? This is what I mean with: stability and portability. glade writes the code, libglade uses a libglade file and gtkbuilder uses it's own XML format. Isn't it better to write down the bare code? Something we can deal with? or will it come next the gtk+make? (gtk+make: the thing that makes everything within gtk and your code [problem?].) and leave to anjuta, the playing around stuff? [anjuta has still some bugs to solve, but ..] I.e Why not to spend the effort on anjuta? Are we able to make a standard that will last for 10 years at least? Sorry for the plural. But I gonna use use this environment for a while. This application runs on linux since 10 years and is reported to be compiled and run under win32 since 6 years. Will it be a nice statment? or.. help me to make it that way. Glade, glade2, glade3, libglade, bare gtk+, gtkbuilder? I have an application and I need it to last for a while. So .. where to? Within GTK+ of course. I used gnome-canvas (kind of deprecated). .. so where to? cheers, F [It might be that I have to write these comments on an other mailing list: so moderator feel free. But still. A bunch of programmers.. opinions?] NOTES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] We should make a couple of changes: RAiD might be: Rapid Application interface Development. Because we deal with Rapid interfaces. But of course the code below is anything but rapid. RAD: Might be for those applications were you can select a kind of icons and you can put them together and get an application. RAID: Should change too. Why would I put my data on a RAID using "inexpensive" disks? I mean if I use RAID5 to protect my data I want quality disks too. The expensive ones. ;) I came from glade when it was writing the code On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:51 AM, Tristan Van Berkom <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/1/28 Fabio Mariotti <[email protected]>: > [...] > > > > The question is: Is glade3 stable enough? > > My opinion obviously biased, Glade 3 (3.6) when released, should be > stable enough. > > Currently I think we are crash free, with only some annoying usability bugs > (and cross project pastes of widget hierarchies with object property > references > are buggy in svn, but also should be cleared up for 3.6, which is scheduled > for the GNOME 2.26 release). > > > I'll need some graphical tunes: libgnome or gtkbuilder? [or what is > the > > difference] > > Because I'll be working on these graphical objects.. > > you mean libglade vs gtkbuilder ? go with gtkbuilder, this will allow you > to dynamically build your treeviews and cell renderers, and give you > generally more access to gtk+ api via the ui file than libglade did. > (libglade is pretty much deprecated by now and unmaintained anyway). > > > Gnomecanvas or drawable area? > > And I am the lonely programmer.. > > long life widgets? > > > > I can rewrite the application now. But I will not do it again. > > Any suggestion? > > Unfortunately I think there is still no officially selected canvas widget > for gtk+, I would stay away from gnome canvas and at the moment > would suggest you look at goocanvas for a canvas api. > > Cheers, > -Tristan >
_______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
