[117] in The GTK GIMP ToolKit mailing list archive
[gtk-list] Re: Proposal for a new project
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Otto Hammersmith)
Tue May 13 16:04:28 1997
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 16:04:08 -0400
From: Otto Hammersmith <otto@redhat.com>
To: gtk-list@redhat.com
In-Reply-To: <199705131916.OAA20052@guinness.cs.umn.edu>; from Shawn T Amundson on Tue, May 13, 1997 at 02:16:29PM -0500
Resent-From: gtk-list@redhat.com
Reply-To: gtk-list@redhat.com
On Tue, May 13, 1997 at 02:16:29PM -0500, Shawn T Amundson wrote:
> Words Of Otto Hammersmith:
> >
> >To that end, I can arrange web and ftp space, and possibly more
> >mailing lists, if need be. I also have some free time I can devote to
> >administrative-type things.
>
> How about a good WWW interface to the gtk-list archives right on
> redhat? The discuss archive is not threaded, etc, etc.
:)
Happy now?
Elliot wasn't here the last time someone asked, so I couldn't just
walk over and ask him. It's all just a matter of timing.
> I should say now I've secretly been working on a GTK web page
> of my own, which is starting to fill out. Take a look:
>
> http://www.cs.umn.edu/~amundson/gtk/
>
> Keep in mind I'm still working on the details.
Very cool.
I'd love to see a comprehensive widget reference.. just two lines on
what the widget does, the "public" functions and maybe the structs
involved. ctags and less helps a lot but it's an awful lot of typing
just to look up one thing. :)
> >Now my opinion on the whole thing... :)
> >
> >I've seen plenty of net-projects die.. either from inactivity or from
> >flame-wars. I'm especially wary about this one, since a lot of the
> >success of the Gimp (and equally GTK) has been the small centralized
> >development team.
> >
> >I'd say the majority of the usefulness behind such a beast would be to
> >reduce duplication of effort... certainly not a pipeline for flamewars
> >over how something should be done or look or whatever.
> >
> >So, I suppose, I want to know what everyone else on this list thinks
> >at this point. Comments?
>
> I'd contribute to such a venture. I think it makes more sence to
> make an C++ interface to GTK that is somewhat similar (but all it's
> own) to Qt to make porting and convincing people easier. But I'm
> not much of a C++ programmer (or C for that matter).
I think a C++ interface is a good idea, and it certainly wouldn't hurt
to make it Qt compatible... it seems GTK would map to a Qt-like C++
interface quite well.
That said, decent Python and Perl interfaces are just as important as
a good C++ interface...
--
-Otto.
--
To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe gtk-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
