Re: [glob2-devel] Are you inspired by Paris ?

[Martin Voelkle]

> >  I defended both QT and Gtk against people who seem to be so desperate
> > about pushing their preferred toolkit that they act like xenophobes
> > (tu sembles tellement acculé que tu commences à dire des conneries).
> > There is no shame in using something just because it does the job and
> > you like it. And because of that, there is no point in arguing against
> > or for anything else. Just use it. And if you don't, don't complain.
> > Because differences between the features of these toolkits are so
> > minor that it really boils down to a matter of taste (which of course
> > implies religion quarrels).
>
> Well, you want me to be serious, here I am:
> I agree that in the end it's a matter of taste. I've tested gtk, gtkmm
> and Qt, and, personnally, I feel better with Qt. It was faster for me to
> get in, and I had the impression that development was faster.
> Additionnally I had student able to hack a image filter that involved
> network, OpenGL and Jpeg decoding in two dsays without any prior
> knowledge of Qt. Leto, who worked on Gtk (quite a long time ago I
> agree), reported problem with undocumented features. But those are
> probably resolved since. In conclusion, perhaps I'm hardwired in some
> way that Qt fits me better.
>
> And don't say I'm religious about Qt, as I'm about to hack a bit for the
>   maemo plateform. I've even been doing win32 those days at job, whose
> widgets API is far worse than both Qt and Gtk (this is just a test to
> see if Seb is reading this mail ;-)).

I would say that hardwired is a sinonym for religious in this case.
It's not about not touching anything else, it's about not wanting to
see pros and cons everywhere.

> >>>That some government is doing it will not make asking for calm while 
> >>>feeding
> >>
> >> > the flames a good tactic to estinguish them.
> >>
> >>Sure, but my post was supposed to be funny, Sarco is not. Or would you,
> >>for fun, argue that Sarco has a very sophisticated (very) dark sense of
> >>humor?
> >>
> >
> >
> >  Sorry, I'm not used to you doing 2nd degree humor.
>
> You know, I'm getting older and all those things ;-)

You are getting good my young Stephawan.

> P.S.    You know, you are very meta-polemic in your intention to be
> a-polemic ;-)

Probably because I never intended to be apolemic...

Martin