Le samedi 17 janvier 2009 22:21:18 Thorsten Behrens, vous avez écrit :
Éric Bischoff wrote:
Recoding for qt, gtk, win32, and Cocoa is a serious duplication of
efforts.
If the purpose for having an abstract layer and porting on so many APIs
is PORTABILITY to many operating systems, then this duplication of
efforts becomes useless, because Qt is already very portable.
If the reason for this effort is strategic INDEPENDANCY towards one
library provider, then yes it makes a lot of sense to have abstraction
layers in the middle.
Hi Thorsten,
definitely the latter, not in the sense of mistrust against the
provider, but knowing the fundamental law that only one thing is
constant - that things are changing. (...)
Yes, that's why I said that the strategic independancy made a lot of sense.
And btw, qt and vcl are actually quite similar in their core design,
and thus share the same weaknesses, conceptually - they don't use
native widgets, but only native look (which is noticeable even
today, if you look closely, and is surely not becoming less of a
problem, c.f. Apple's deprecation plans...).
Yes, I presented Qt as a replacement for VCL because they really work on the
same level.
There's a huge difference between VCL and Qt though: while Qt is company-
supported and has a huge user base, VCL is developed and maintained by
OpenOffice.org only.
Replacing VCL with Qt would have been a way to externalize maintenance
efforts. And it's not only VCL that has to be maintained, but also all the
platform-specific plugins (Windows, Cocoa, etc.)
(...)
--
Writing about music is like dancing about architecture -- Elvis Costello
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
