August wrote:There's no doubt that it would be a significant project for a number of reasons (C++, the Qt meta object compiler, etc.) I have seen the guy doing some work on a Qt binding already and he looks a bit lonely. From the perspective of a company creating commercial software, the look of Gtk is a bit of a turn-off as it doesn't seem to match the native look well. That judgment is mostly from working with GIMP and a few other Gtk based applications, and not working with the toolkit itself so it may not be a valid one.
Anyway, I do know that Qt is an excellent toolkit across platforms and a Lisp binding would grant one of my lispy wishes
TheGZeus wrote:Clojure has full Qt/KDE bindings via Java, so that might be... something... ummm...
dmitry_vk wrote:Qt moc seems to actually be a great help in the task of writing the binding. Because it allows to automatically gather information about classes and it provides general method of invoking methods and properties of objects.
I guess the main reason for absence of a complete Qt binding (and many other large libraries) is the lack of requrement for it. E.g., a single hacker starts the project for its fun, it gets semi-complete and then abandoned because at the time, noone needed it and the hacker's motivation is depleted. On the other, I think that it is possible for one man to create a complete Qt binding in the time of month or two.
For me, Gtk+ looks good, both on windows and linux.But that's just my opinion.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests