On Wednesday 29 August 2012 17:13:27 Timothy Pearson wrote:
> > I don't understand this obsession for Qt4+ and KDE4. KDE4 is every time a
> > step
> > behind GNOME. For this reason I preffer to patch a little the Qt3 to
> > support
> > glib mainloop and then I will develop various applications based on
> > excellent
> > libraries provided by GNOME community. Moreover, glib integration is not
> > broke Qt3 API, so I don't need to patch any of older KDE3 apps.
>
> This is a matter of opinion. ;-)  I used to program GTK applications, and
> in my opinion they are very hard to code and maintain past a certain size
> and complexity level. 

I say about glib libraries, not about gtk ones. For example, kopete can be a 
simple shell for libpurple, knetworkmanager can be a shell around libnm-glib, 
the same thing I did for kpolkit-agent and so on. Even KDE4's polkit-qt-1 is 
a simple bridge between Qt4 and libpolkit-1.

Moreover, KDE4 libraries tend to be very tight linked to KDE4 core libraries, 
while the GNOME libraries often depends only to glib (which is used anyway by 
KDE3/TDE, for example in aRts and other modules).

> Qt3/4/5 applications on the other hand seem more 
> scalable, and those libraries provide many useful features in their
> respective APIs which were lacking when I last tried the GTK libraries.
>
> > Minor hack or no, it is ugly. Replacing strings automatically introduces
> > a risk to make unwanted changes (which sometimes are translated in
> > strange and
> > hard to hunt bugs).
>
> At this point most, of not all, of those bugs have been found and stamped
> out.  There is no real reason not to use TQt3, with its better
> compatibility and continued development, except for personal preference.
>

Well, I think that original Qt3's API is powerful enough, it needs just some 
underground tweaks (like glib eventloop support).

-- 
Serghei