[linux-audio-dev] Re: OSC-Question

Jan Depner eviltwin69 at cableone.net
Tue Mar 29 17:14:14 UTC 2005

Uh, I wasn't the one who said that about signals/slots.  I do like them
but what I said was that you need to look at what you are trying to
accomplish before you decide on what toolkit to use.  For anything that
is going to be near real-time I would keep the code as streamlined as
possible.  For user interfaces that aren't hooked up to a near real-time
application I use Qt because it's much more well-defined, documented,
and mature than the other options.  I think that Paul has taken the
correct path for what he is doing.  I think Qt would be too much
overhead for Ardour.


On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 10:38, Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> >From: Jan Depner <eviltwin69 at cableone.net>
> >
> >> >No, imho one of the main advantages is Qt's Signal/Slot mechanism
> >
> >> sigc++
> How to implement signal/slot mechanism in simplest terms with C?
> In my opinion, sometimes it is unnecessary to link to a massive
> code libraries if only one feature is needed.
> AlsaModularSynth uses Qt's signals and slots in audio processing,
> and thus requires the whole Qt and mixes GUI toolkit to audio side.
> It could be wise to use sigc++ or minimal S/S code in audio processing
> and Qt only in GUI.
> But because Qt comes with every Linux distribution, maybe bad
> dependencies can be allowed.
> Juhana

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list