The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: qt license

On Fri, 31 Oct 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:

> I -really- like how GTK is designed (Deitys widget's follow an almost
> identical path, even though I had no knowledge of how GTK worked till very
> recently) but I highly dislike the use of a contrived OO mechanism ontop
> of plain C.

But a lot of people prefer C; can your widget set sensible be called from
C at all? 

A widget set really is an obvious example of where object orientation is
good, so it isn't surprising that they've attempted to use object
orientation in C. Incidentally Xt is object oriented too---there's a lot
wrong with Xt, but the way they've handled the object orientation isn't
one of them, it is very nicely done IMO. 

> Also, I really don't like how QT is designed, enough that I wouldn't want
> to use it at all. If KDE hadn't already started using QT I would
> discourage any sort of FreeQT project on the simple reasoning that it is
> not a very good widget implementation (IMHO of course).

You mean the API isn't very nice, or what? I haven't looked at it really,
as just its licence put me off.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .