On 3 June 2010 20:39, Marc Santhoff wrote: > No it isn't pointless. You forget about embedded computers, they are not > growing over time and are running on small amounts of resources, e.g. a > 233 MHz Geode CPU having 64 MB of RAM. I wouldn't even dare to try GTK2 > on that little things.
Then switch to fpGUI for embedded systems. It works perfectly and is low on resources and small size executables. Plus fpGUI is a lot more modern in looks than GTK1 - and fpGUI is still actively being developed. :) But yes, I kind of see your point. But do you also know that LCL-GTK1 is *not* being maintained at all any more. You might complain, but clearly nobody is actually using LCL-GTK1 any more because so far it is only I that noticed that LCL-GTK1 is currently broken. Most of the times it can't compile, and when it does you can't even us it in applications, because the simplest program will make it crash at runtime (as my previous posts highlight and error log showed). So if I was still maintaining an application that must use GTK1, I'll definitely stay with whatever Lazarus LCL-GTK1 version was the most stable. So far, that seems to be v0.9.26.2 > But what exactly is the benefit of doing all this work? 1) It will be the start of cleaning up the spaghetti code required for GTK2 2) The cleanup will probably allow LCL-GTK2 to be easier to maintain. Most here complain that it's a mess. 3) Ending up with clearer code, it might even make LCL-GTK2 less buggy (like it's counterpart LCL-Qt - which is much younger code by the way). 4) Why advertise a feature that is constantly broken. Lazarus is already well know for being buggy - so why add fuel to the flames. 5) Code evolves. Out with the old, in with the new. -- Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
