On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 21:26 +0100, Klaus Rotter wrote:
> Klaus Rotter schrieb:
> > Well, it is (to me) more a question of C vs C++. I started with C about
> > twenty years ago and liked it a lot. But some of the features of C++ in
> > addition with Qt are IMHO more "elegant", if you use a OO too
Klaus Rotter schrieb:
> Well, it is (to me) more a question of C vs C++. I started with C about
> twenty years ago and liked it a lot. But some of the features of C++ in
> addition with Qt are IMHO more "elegant", if you use a OO toolkit with
> an OO language like C++. E.g. methods overloading (
Levi Bard schrieb:
> Gtk has been bound for a huge number of languages, including vala,
> c++, ruby, python, c#, perl, ada, d, haskell, ocaml, pascal, php,
> pike, tcl, and euphoria. [1]
Of course, I know this. I dug a little into python and gtk on maemo
(which seems nice), but I tend toward usin
Jürg Billeter schrieb:
> You might be interested in Vala[1][2], then.
Yes, that's interesting. Thanks for the link!
> Jürg
>
> [1] http://live.gnome.org/Vala
> [2] http://live.gnome.org/Vala/HildonSample
-Klaus
--
Klaus Rotter * klaus at rotters dot de * www.rotters.de
_
Same here, C++ has too many confusing features, is bloated, creates
bloated object code, and meaning isn't always clear. And above all,
it's library-incompatible with itself...
C++ is never a good choice nowadays, IMHO.
Cheers,
Martin
2008/1/29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tue,
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Klaus Rotter wrote:
> Well, it is (to me) more a question of C vs C++. I started with C about
> twenty years ago and liked it a lot. But some of the features of C++ in
> addition with Qt are IMHO more "elegant", if you use a OO toolkit with
> an OO language like C++. E.g. m
Jürg Billeter a écrit :
> On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 21:06 +0100, Klaus Rotter wrote:
>> Maybe the best would be C# (I like C# as a language design better that
>> java) with a native gtk# interface and a compiler with compiles this to
>> machine code. A gcc# would be nice...
>
> You might be interest
> Well, it is (to me) more a question of C vs C++. I started with C about
> twenty years ago and liked it a lot. But some of the features of C++ in
> addition with Qt are IMHO more "elegant", if you use a OO toolkit with
> an OO language like C++. E.g. methods overloading (which is really nice).
G
Klaus Rotter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> But I often think C++ has to many features (for sure I didn't know them
> all) and it is bloated whereas I think I know pretty much features of C.
I recently discovered the C++ FQA-lite at http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/
It is an entertaining read for language
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 21:06 +0100, Klaus Rotter wrote:
> Well, it is (to me) more a question of C vs C++. I started with C about
> twenty years ago and liked it a lot. But some of the features of C++ in
> addition with Qt are IMHO more "elegant", if you use a OO toolkit with
> an OO language lik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Klaus Rotter wrote:
>
>> I really like the look and feel of Maemo, but IMHO Qt's API is superior
>> to the one of Gtk.
>
> Ive heard this a few times without people mentioning any speicifcs? In
> what way is it superior? Are there features in Qt
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Klaus Rotter wrote:
> I really like the look and feel of Maemo, but IMHO Qt's API is superior
> to the one of Gtk.
Ive heard this a few times without people mentioning any speicifcs? In
what way is it superior? Are there features in Qt that are not in GTK (and
vice versa)
Hi, I tried to answer the original question of this thread here:
http://flors.wordpress.com/2008/01/29/gnomes-trolls-and-the-maemo-lands/
Hope it helps understanding.
--
Quim Gil
http://maemo.org
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo
disclaimer: all that I say is my personal opinion, and not the opinion
o my employee.
On Jan 29, 2008 8:56 AM, Klaus Rotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
> > dunno, I'm not them to know for sure. But the platform is there
> > already, works, supported, they have the
Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
> dunno, I'm not them to know for sure. But the platform is there
> already, works, supported, they have the hackers working for them,
> it's not about something to come, it's something that exists (and is
Until here you can think both of Maemo and Qt (aka Qtopia)
Hi,
Is there a transcript of the webcast available somewhere? I'm not too
fond of registering on another website just for viewing a single
webcast.
Cheers,
Martin
2008/1/28, Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 15:42 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Just saw this on maem
On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 15:42 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Just saw this on maemo-users list:
>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 03:24:30PM +, Matt Emson wrote:
>
> http://www.nokia.com/A4813580 -> go to webcast
>
> According to Kai Oistamo (around minute 9):
>
> "I want also to make clear that
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
> Don't fool yourself. Qt is to Nokia what Linux was to IBM: the only
> way to unify the development of various hardware platform. You can bet
> it's no fun to develop libs to s40 and s60, so why leave internet
> tablets out of this?
Just saw t
On Jan 28, 2008 4:46 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
>
> > Don't fool yourself. Qt is to Nokia what Linux was to IBM: the only
> > way to unify the development of various hardware platform. You can bet
> > it's no fun to develop libs to s40 and
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
> Don't fool yourself. Qt is to Nokia what Linux was to IBM: the only
> way to unify the development of various hardware platform. You can bet
> it's no fun to develop libs to s40 and s60, so why leave internet
> tablets out of this?
Why bother
On Jan 28, 2008 2:25 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Jae Stutzman wrote:
>
> > This is really strange. We have stayed away from qt due to the
> > commercial license required to do proprietary apps. Gtk fits the bill
> > nicely for us, so where is the future of maemo now? This
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Jae Stutzman wrote:
> This is really strange. We have stayed away from qt due to the
> commercial license required to do proprietary apps. Gtk fits the bill
> nicely for us, so where is the future of maemo now? This is quite
> strange. Nokia reminds me of the weather in Texas.
This is really strange. We have stayed away from qt due to the
commercial license required to do proprietary apps. Gtk fits the bill
nicely for us, so where is the future of maemo now? This is quite
strange. Nokia reminds me of the weather in Texas...very unpredictable
:)
Jae
_
Hi,
> Welcome to the world of large, multi-national companies. I don't
> imagine Nokia's M&A teams were particularly mindful of the Qt/Gtk
> distinction in Maemo when they made the acquisition.
Yes, of course I'm aware of the dynamics inside a huge company.
But Nokia is a technology company, so
On Jan 28, 2008 4:52 AM, Martin Grimme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I also don't think that the acquisition was maemo-related in any way.
> But I hope that they won't switch hildon from GTK to Qt. The main
> reason why I'm developing for the tablets is because they're
> GTK-based.
Agreed ... it wo
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, =?UTF-8?Q?Beno=C3=AEt=20HERVIER=20 wrote:
> I think their are more interested by the OS "Qtopia Phone Edition" than QT on
> Maemo.
Although this has some backing on the press release, it's still my
personal speculation: Qt is reasonably portable, and Nokia has already
demo
Ross,
Even back in the bad old 80's when I was running a training
and consultancy company up in Finland, I only half-joked that
a medium-sized consultancy company could stay fully employed
just going around Nokia telling departments what the other
departments were up to. And back then Nokia was a
I also don't think that the acquisition was maemo-related in any way.
But I hope that they won't switch hildon from GTK to Qt. The main
reason why I'm developing for the tablets is because they're
GTK-based.
Cheers,
Martin
2008/1/28, Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 03:2
I think their are more interested by the OS "Qtopia Phone Edition" than QT on
Maemo.
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:46:56 +, Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 03:29 -0500, Reggie Suplido wrote:
>> I guess the big news today is that Nokia is acquiring Trolltech:
>> http:/
On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 03:29 -0500, Reggie Suplido wrote:
> I guess the big news today is that Nokia is acquiring Trolltech:
> http://trolltech.com/28012008/28012008
>
> How do you think will this improve/affect Maemo?
Rememeber that the mobile phone division has nothing to do with the
tablet divi
On Jan 28, 2008 9:20 AM, Hanno Zulla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reggie Suplido schrieb:
> > I guess the big news today is that Nokia is acquiring Trolltech:
>
> I have to admit: I don't get Nokia.
Welcome to the world of large, multi-national companies. I don't
imagine Nokia's M&A teams were par
Reggie Suplido schrieb:
> I guess the big news today is that Nokia is acquiring Trolltech:
> http://trolltech.com/28012008/28012008
>
> How do you think will this improve/affect Maemo?
I have to admit: I don't get Nokia.
So they invest in Maemo for several years, which is based on GTK.
Now they
I guess the big news today is that Nokia is acquiring Trolltech:
http://trolltech.com/28012008/28012008
How do you think will this improve/affect Maemo?
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo
33 matches
Mail list logo
