View Single Post
daperl's Avatar
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#26
Originally Posted by attila77 View Post
A common problem in comparisons like this is that people compare what GObject gives them with C++ (and go ranting on how this or that is ugly in C++ ). That is is the wrong comparison, as Qt is not just a set of libraries, but a full-blown framework (even more so than GObject/GTK) - if you're using Qt, the valid question is if Qt addresses the problems C++ has/had, and often the answer is yes, like in the case or various monitor patters, reference counting, etc (in fact, sometimes I feel as if it's a C++ compatible C derivative of it's own, given all the syntactic sugar and patterns it introduces)
I was just speculating at a reason for an idiosyncrasy. But if you're implying that idiosyncrasies can cause brittleness, I agree with you. Does Qt have any idiosyncrasies?

Originally Posted by vivainio View Post
Qt is not particularly slow on N900 (I have no reason to think Hildon would be any faster). Even startup time is quite tolerable, less than 3 secs for a small Qt application.
Qt apps seem to run very well on the n900, it's when building one on the n900 that Hell starts to freeze.
__________________
N9: Go white or go home