On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 07:02:13PM -0800, johnf wrote:
> If writting a wrapper was easy why haven't we got a completed QT interface?
The same reason as why GTK exists at all. QT had license problems for a long
while. There simply was not much interest.
Moreover, Lazarus is way more than a wrapper. It is a full designer system.
> Why does the GTK2 have so many bugs?
All widget sets have bugs.
> With regard to the speed of Python. I truly wonder if today we have to be
> concerned with performance since most of the time is spent in the GUI.
All the python apps I've seen (and that were not that many, mostly small
time utils) were also annoyingly slow in the GUI.
Also a lot of buildprocesses have scripted parts, (xorg, tetex, openoffice
to name but a few), and they actually manage to spend more time in
generating a few files using a script than compiling the C app.
> Like FPC 'c' can be used to improve any specially slow routines in
> python. BTW the link suggest that Python won a few of the test. I find
> this fact to be strange considering FPC is compiled.
Multiple reasons possible. Python delegating to more optimized C code (IOW
mostly bound not by Python code), or a simplistic benchmark (like some
recursion stuff) that the parrot engine can optimize away.
> I like FPC and Lazarus. But to suggest that Python is not an equal I
> believe is miss leading and not taking the facts in consideration. BTW
> most of what I have said also applies to Ruby.
Now you really spoiled it. The only Ruby app I know is the FreeBSD
portupgrade package, and it is unbearably slow.
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
