Xiong Jiang wrote:
It's just my personal preference. :) Some people like GTK more while
some like QT more. Whichever they like, they always can express their
preference. It's not about the business to _evaluate_ the toolkit.
IMHO C++ _is_ a little profounded (or in my awkard English,
Xiong Jiang wrote:
It's just my personal preference. :) Some people like GTK more while
some like QT more. Whichever they like, they always can express their
preference. It's not about the business to _evaluate_ the toolkit.
IMHO C++ _is_ a little profounded (or in my awkard English,
I am just a user not a programmer of software based on GTK+ but I feel very sorry if GTK+ is on the track like what you guys expressed in this thread. I like GTK a lot as I always prefer C over bloated (somehow) C++ language. And GTK did very neat work too. I would think that many other people
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 9/29/2005 10:19 AM, Xiong Jiang wrote:
I am just a user not a programmer of software based on GTK+ but I feel
very sorry if GTK+ is on the track like what you guys expressed in this
thread. I like GTK a lot as I always prefer C over bloated
Erik Harrison wrote:
I think ultimately we just need to be active in the Gtk+ community so
that it as much as possible remains useful to us.
It isn't going to become broken in the short term. The various changes
coming out of project Ridley could go either way. It could totally
screw up
