On 15-Sep-00 at 17:22, Alexander Mai ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 17:30:39 +0000 (GMT), Carlos A M dos Santos wrote:
>
> >Motif has many features that are not used because using them requires
> >knowing X, Xt, etc. Most of the free software written as "open source" is
> >made by weekend programmers, this is the problem, IMO. [...]
>
> What's the problem here?!?
> I have no problems with those nice toolkits which enables one to write
> a simple GUI app (some fancy dialogs and e.g. a displayed bitmap)
> in <<50 lines ...
>
> >> (but may be: too big, too hard to code/use, no fancy default look, no
> >> C++, etc.)
> >
> >"Too big" is a changing concept. For the current standards, Motif is
> >small. WRT C++, it's also a matter of taste. Pure C code is still much
> >more portable than C++ and some programmers, like me, dislike C++.
>
> Hmm.
> No need to discuss this in length but I think it would have been a good
> idea (for Motif) to further go in the C++ direction. I rarely mess around
> with C++ but even with small C++ apps it's sometimes a pain to get the
> C bindings done properly.
> And obviously C++ is still increasing it's market share - at least compared
> to C (in my opinion - I have no data about this)
I also know next to nothing about C++. But what I do know I remember from the
early days of Mozilla. There was a _lot_ of talk about "don't use this feature
of C++ because it is not portable". So the majority of the code ended up
looking like plain C, at least to me. In my opinion, openDX looks like a very
good implementation of "use the tool that is right for the job". I still think
that C is just, if not more so, as portable as Java. Because if you can't write
the Java interpreter for the platform of choice, Java doesn't have a hope in
hell of running....
>
>
> ---
> Alexander Mai
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
