Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Guillaume Laurent on Friday 16/Mar/2001, @06:30

> Anyway, why does KuickShow use it if Imlib is too bad?

If I recall correctly it was ok if all you want to do is load and display images. Trying to manage pixmaps was quite more painful.

> Then write a C++ wrapper with a good API.

Be my guest.

> What's wrong with the integration, code consistency and stability?

What's wrong with using a library which depends ona whole slew of others, and has a completely different API than the rest of the KDE ?

> And what's wrong with the documentation?

Last time I looked (a long time ago), the little that existed sucked big time.

Related Links

·   Articles on Graphics and Art
·   Also by Guillaume Laurent
·   Contact author

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

Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Kirby on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @00:57

<I>"What's wrong with using a library which depends ona whole slew of others,"</I>

GDK and Glib are the only dependencies.
If you call 2 dependencies "a whole slew", then what do you call KDEBase's dependencies?

<I>"Last time I looked (a long time ago), the little that existed sucked big time."</I>

And just when was the last time you checked?

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Guillaume on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @01:50

You're correct, there aren't that many dependencies. However does including GDK and GLib in KDE really makes sense to you ?

> And just when was the last time you checked?

More than a year ago. But you're right, Raster probably found the time to write a great doc for it while writing imlib2. :-)

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Carsten Pfeiffer on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @02:44

Actually you don't need gdk or glib AFAIK. Imlib1 actually consisted of two libraries, one with GDK, one plain Xlib. I used the plain Xlib one.

With Imlib2, I don't even see any GDK at all.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Bernd Gehrmann on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @08:44

Apparently you lost track of the thread :-)
The previous comments were about gdk-pixbuf,
not imlib.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Guillaume Laurent on Sunday 18/Mar/2001, @03:30

Well, no, I actually thought Kirby was still talking about imlib1 :-).

Oh well. That doesn't change much. While I agree that any of imlib[12] or gdk-pixbuf might make sense for an image viewer, using any of them in KDE would be a huge blunder.

There. :-).

[ Reply To This | View ]

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


		"Nobody will ever write that kind of HTML code!" -- The KHTML Team
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.