Re: Cool

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Cool
by ca on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @00:11

<I>"...until the get hacked or crash!"</I>

No, even then they won't care. See the success of MS Windows, dispite the hacks and crashes. Ease of use, that's the most important thing. They couldn't care less about your language flamewars.

Related Links

·   Articles on Qt
·   Also by ca
·   Contact author

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

Re: Cool
by M on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @01:54

You didnt understand anything. Its not a language flamewar, its just that the situation on linux et al. is very disapointing technologywise. We are not in the position to cheat IBM once more as MS did, neither has linux the marketshare to afford low quality C libs like Windows.
Everyone is creating modern frameworks in something nice like C++/ObjC(++)/Java/C# or whatever. Look at MacOS X, Sun, or even BeOS. Only free software is mostly crapped up with C. KDE/Qt is one of the few exceptions and that is the reasons why it attracted many developers.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by koos on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @03:10

Instead of spitting on C, where is the C++ variant then. DCOP never made it outside KDE AFAIK. And DCOP has it drawbacks, eg. an DCOP object is tied to its application object name. Recently I started using kmix for volume control. But where is the kmix object, inside kicker, somewhere else, or not running at all? These are question you _don't_ want to care about when just wanting to control the volume. Besides, KDE is obsessed with multi-platform. Read the threads, nobody dares to implement hotplug/sysfs, or how are they called, events.
Thanks to Qt taking the lead (and of course work from the dbus/kernel developers!!!), we'll finally have these in KDE.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by ca on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @07:40

Then you should have said so instead of calling it a "shitty language" with no further explanation.

Anyway, C++ has its share of problems. The lack of a stable ABI being the most important one. GCC 2.95 vs 3.0 vs 3.1 vs 3.1.1 vs 3.2 vs 3.4, all have different C++ ABIs. KDE apps compiled with 3.2 won't work on 3.4 distributions unless the user recompiles QT and other libraries.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by M on Friday 24/Sep/2004, @15:31

Not too long ago the C++ ABI was standardised. I am not 100% sure but I think its based on an aggreement between gcc and intel.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Cool
by ca on Saturday 25/Sep/2004, @23:29

The C++ ABI was *already* standardized. But it's so complex that nobody has managed to do it correctly. A while ago, both GCC and Intel found bugs in their compiler so they 'fixed' them and now produce a different ABI. How long before they find more bugs and break ABI yet again?

[ Reply To This | View ]

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


		"Default settings are easy to manage." -- Aaron Seigo
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.