11 Apr
2004
11 Apr
'04
4:16 p.m.
Samuel Abels:
On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 16:36, Kjetil Svalastog
Matheussen wrote:
You mentioned Python in the same sentence with "non-crippled language",
which clearly proofs your good sense of humor. ;)
That set aside, here are some of my reasons:
* Audio applications are usually very CPU intensive. Having a complete
screen full of different canvases updated all the time *is* CPU
intensive. I am not saying that it is impossible to create a GUI fast
enough with higher level languages, I am just saying that the difference
is significant enough that many users may suffer from it.
* Often, there are great advantages in having the whole application use
only one language. This has advantages in both, maintainance and
performance as well (converting data types is expencive).
Okey, these are good points. However, I should just wish everyone knew
lisp, then the world would be a better place. :)
--
So, in
essence, gtkmm does it in a more C++ way. :-) (But please let us
not make this a flame; may everyone be free to choose whatever toolkit
he likes best. ;) )
Then my question becomes:
Why on earth use C++? Use a desent high-level non-crippled language like
lisp, python or ruby. Yes, this might start a flame-war, but I really
think people
should be aware of the C/C++-stupidness.
This is simply wrong. C++ is way faster in many cases. Also, writing a
GTK2 GUI in C++ is not slower than using a high level language. In fact,
the API is almost identical in most cases. And this is from someone who
has created several GTK2 based projects using Perl OOP with GTK2.