Comments on: GTK+ 3.0: Getting serious.

By: Alex Dedul

Alex Dedul — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 11:35:24 +0000

Nice article, thank you..

By: |>> GNOME

|>> GNOME — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:33:22 +0000

[...] abgerufen am 14. Juli 2009↑ blogs.gnome.org the future of …, abgerufen am 14. Juli 2009↑ Federkiel – GTK 3.0: Getting Serious, abgerufen am 14. Juli 2009↑ GNOME: Get Footware (englisch) – Liste mit Distributionen mit [...]

By: Yaro

Yaro — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:55:29 +0000

The only thing I care about in GTK+ 3 is RGBA support. I find it to be pretty good in its application in GTK+ 2.

Sure, Murrine (A GTK+ 2 engine) has some RGBA features, but it only supports maybe a handful of apps… and they have to be precompiled for it or use a plugin. Not good.

So yes, a delivery date on RGBA support would make me very happy, as well as some themes that would use it.

By: Zeke

Zeke — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 14:23:26 +0000

Too bad GTK+ will never become as good as Qt4. GTK+ needs to drop the ugly C interface. C isn’t meant for GUI work. Look at how win32 is. C is meant for other things. Hence why game developers aren’t using C anymore. Because C++ has inheritance, operating overloading, ploymorphism. What does C offer nothing really. Maybe speed to a certain degree. But give it up, either fully going C# or go C++. Because you’re losing the race one way or another sticking with C.

By: Stefan Nuxoll

Stefan Nuxoll — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:34:06 +0000

GTK is *already* OO in C, and it’s written in C for a reason. *Anything* can talk to C easily, the same can’t be said for C++.

By: Oliver

Oliver — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:31:44 +0000

I think it’s a good idea to change over to an OOP like C++. The object oriented way is better for the human brain. You have tools like UML to visualize your architecture, to discuss it with other guys, to think about details.

By: Marek

Marek — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:10:45 +0000

What about Apache2 license ? It would be lovely to have Apache2 license GUI toolkit
LGPL is allowed in commercial use but thare are many to prefer Apache2 license.
I believe that it would spread GTK even more.

By: caracal

caracal — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:24:07 +0000

Sorry i was caught up in the moment and made a mistake what i meant was “then choose a toolkit designed for c++”

By: raphael

raphael — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:25:50 +0000

@caracal; I’m sure you meant to write : “… then choose a toolkit designed for c++”, didn’t you?

By: caracal

caracal — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:46:43 +0000

To the c++ advocates if you want to use c++ then choose a language designed for c++ (fltk, fox, gtkmm, qt) but leave gtk+ alone and stop trying to
push c++ down our throats! Gtk+ is a c programmers toolkit and we want to keep it that way.