From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,874959b8413ac400 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-19 08:37:40 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!unlnews.unl.edu!newsfeed.ksu.edu!nntp.ksu.edu!news.okstate.edu!not-for-mail From: David Starner Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Book to learn GtkAda Date: 19 Oct 2001 14:08:40 GMT Organization: Oklahoma State University Message-ID: <9qpc58$8a21@news.cis.okstate.edu> References: <9qn2t5$7pu1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <9qnc4s$gl7$1@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de> Reply-To: dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org NNTP-Posting-Host: x8b4e5643.dhcp.okstate.edu User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.2 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14941 Date: 2001-10-19T14:08:40+00:00 List-Id: On 18 Oct 2001 19:56:12 GMT, Adrian Knoth wrote: > David Starner wrote: > >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/qtada/ >> Read the page; its goal is to produce a clone, not a binding. > > Is this good or not? I feel glad about every vanished C(++), but OTOH > a lot of people call Qt in the current state a supreme library. Why produce a clone? If you want to get rid of the C++ part of it, write something similar to it, but better. I don't see any way that one could write a compariable library to GTK or QT with the amount of available manpower; it's much more productive to write a binding and go make something interesting. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org "I saw a daemon stare into my face, and an angel touch my breast; each one softly calls my name . . . the daemon scares me less." - "Disciple", Stuart Davis