Re: SMOKE

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: SMOKE
by Adam Treat on Tuesday 17/Sep/2002, @16:27

In a word no. They are completely different beasts. SMOKE allows the binding developer an easier method of creating bindings for Qt/KDE. .Net is a development platform.

Related Links

·   Articles on Developer
·   Also by Adam Treat
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: SMOKE
by Marc on Wednesday 18/Sep/2002, @07:07

I thought it was designed to be independant of the scripting language on one side and the language of the library on the other side, so that you could create bindings for all kinds of things. One example being Qt to python bindings. Aren't other combinations possible?

Marc

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: SMOKE
by Evan "JabberWokky" E. on Wednesday 18/Sep/2002, @11:18

Yes, but then you're creating a language that makes calls to a toolkit library. .NET is more like Java, in that it targets a virtual machine, which waaay back in the day we'd call it "like P-Code": a binary file that is executed by an interpreter. .NET and Java can call Qt, since it's a toolkit library (assuming that the VM supports API extensions a la libraries, which they, like all modern VMs, both do).

A .NET binary should run on any machine, but has the overhead hit of being abstracted from the system, with the expected performance and features issues. Java forged the way, so those issues have been minimized, but still exist. A Qt/whatever application can run on any supported platform if you have the right compiler or interpreter, a KDE/whatever application works the same, but you need the kdelibs. It's lower level, and the binary isn't portable, since it's targeted to that platform.

(To *really* confuse things, Java is both a VM and a language, and the language can be compiled and targeted to a platform, resulting in executable code not needing the VM.)

--
Evan (who just woke up, needs to run out the door, and may have said something stupid without rereading. Correct at will, just be gentle. :) )

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"I switch between vi and xemacs quite a lot. I'm happy with both." -- Simon Hausmann
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.