[Gllug] sid & kde3
matt.amos at ic.ac.uk
Tue Jul 2 08:50:57 UTC 2002
On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 05:24:34PM +0100, Nix wrote:
> > in contrast gnome 2.0
> > is virtually impossible to compile from scratch and the dependancy hell
> > requires a set of scripts to do the build for you!
> But it doesn't look as horrid as KDE,
that is a matter of great opinion ;)
> and it doesn't use a demented
> distorted ugly broken dysfunctional core-dumping slow horrible
> preprocessor, and its C++ bindings are substantially nicer than KDE's
> (why oh why does Qt, even Qt 3, reinvent half the C++ standard library
> in a completely and totally half-assed way that shows their lack of
> understanding of anything the STL part of that library is about?)
iirc, the whole pre-preprocessor and non-compliant syntax in qt which
tries to emulate the STL is an attempt to make qt more portable -
trolltech didnt seem to think that there was a decent C++ implementation
for most platforms.
> Pardon me. I don't like GNOME much, especially their apparent belief
> that all you need is CORBA bindings for something and you don't need to
> write bindings to any decent scripting languages at all, and Miguel's
> apparent desire to add everything that's most broken about Windows into
> Unix, but it's still a hell of a lot nicer than KDE, from the
> infrastructural point of view.
which is probably why it takes as long to load a C++ KDE program as it
does to load a CORBA-bound GNOME program.
>  I don't even like cpp: but there is *no* excuse for moc.
how could you not like cpp? its the very basis of code obfuscation
"Only the educated are free." -- Epictetus
Gllug mailing list - Gllug at linux.co.uk
More information about the GLLUG