Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Wed, 22 May 2002, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >>>Boost signals however delegates creation of functions objects and >>>binding to two other libs, with sigc++ this is integrated in the >>>signal/slot code. >>> > | Not quite as nice then. > > What is not quite as nice? > > I'd argue that SigC is "not as nice", since it mixes idoms. > boost::signals has them separated so that you can both change the > bining lib without telling boost::signals, and the same with the > boost::function lib (library for delayed calling of functions). > > >>>Am I correct in beliving that gtkmm cannot exist without sigc++, and >>>that if gtkmm is installed then a libsigc++ will also be installed? >>>(so we won't have to provide sigc++ with lyx as we do now) >>> > | Now that libsigc++ is more wide spread (ie. when it was included few > | major distros had a useful version of it) I want to remove it from the > | dist -- whether we require it for all signals or just for the gtk > | stuff. > > It seems to not be disted with RH. > >
What about other platforms? DEC, Sun, ... -- ------------------------------------------------ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | beusen Solutions GmbH fon: +49 30 549932-426 | Landsberger Allee 366 fax: +49 30 549932-921 | 12681 Berlin, Germany ------------------------------------------------
