>> Qt's drawing code is full of such optimizations, and it represents >> man years of effort. This is the only way to get XCircuit to >> perform well IMHO. > > There was a time when I considered porting to Qt. At the time, both > Qt and GTK were in a comparatively primitive state. It was not clear > to me that either one would survive very long.
I agree. About the only real differences were: the choice of C++ as the language, and Qt putting bread on the table of Trolltech employees. GTK didn't ever directly contribute to a corporate payroll AFAIK. > I can't say that I'm > convinced of the long-term survival of Qt even now, but I can't argue > that well-organized code has a much higher chance of survival, and > xcircuit needs the reorganization. At least Qt has corporate backing of Nokia. They have recently reasserted that they consider Qt a strategic asset and that they plan their UI future around it. Unless Nokia decides to throw out tens of millions USD worth of running, debugged device code that runs on Qt, I don't see Qt disappearing any time soon (famous last words, I hope not). Cheers, Kuba _______________________________________________ Xcircuit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.opencircuitdesign.com/mailman/listinfo/xcircuit-dev
