From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE77DBC6B for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 17:18:47 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAMp2iEfOvjGtoWdsb2JhbACQCQEBAQECBQQGCQkXlnM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,275,1196636400"; d="scan'208";a="7735827" Received: from web54603.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.49.173]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with SMTP; 12 Jan 2008 17:18:47 +0100 Received: (qmail 31532 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Jan 2008 16:18:46 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=l/1P8hYPmWsp7C2dmjdah4RR8XYChzwsJlXX4nvXbCLs0vuNmG/orPBeA0w9v8vC/0JuwjRetyMp+PdK+Ixk8JeJj2doahf1RucabuKVSGf8ZhoC+nQIxr/s8bq0+KvmurVvdMsWRdphf2OcvAUH8Egh2d/HMWs4XOpdzmS92TY=; X-YMail-OSG: PDH7gMoVM1mosbAIblbGQ4q1RLFQalQR8fCVBJ4AayDFrFRCpiI56WMaf4Fyw2O13w-- Received: from [85.244.8.233] by web54603.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 16:18:46 GMT Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 16:18:46 +0000 (GMT) From: Dario Teixeira Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Performance questions, -inline, ... To: Jon Harrop , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <200801121422.56951.jon@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <470169.25970.qm@web54603.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-Spam: no; 0.00; -inline:01 gtk:01 gtk:01 ocaml:01 ocamlnet:01 cduce:01 ocaml:01 bindings:01 haskell:01 bindings:01 haskell's:01 ffi:01 ocaml's:01 cheers:01 allies:98 Hi, > > IMHO, the latter is now a few years ahead of GTK, and is only gaining the > > advantage as time passes. > > May I ask what features Qt has that GTK does not? Though some would argue this is a matter of taste, Qt feels like a much more elegant API. And yes, feature-wise is also a far more comprehensive library. It includes modules not only for the expected GUI widgets, but also for database connectivity, XML processing, network programming, easy integration with openGL, generation and visualisation of SVG and PDF, etc, etc. Moreover, the various modules are well integrated and go well together. To achieve the same degree of functionality in Gtk-land, you need to mix in several independent libraries (Gtk+Cairo+...), which not always feel like part of a coherent whole. You could of course argue that in the Ocaml world we have better solutions for some of the modules present in Qt. Ocamlnet is top-notch, and the facilities for XML processing (such as Cduce and allies) are so good you probably will find the similarly-purposed Qt modules unnecessary. Nevertheless, just the graphics facilities present in Qt would more than justify Ocaml bindings. Incidentally, the Haskell folks are working on bindings: http://qthaskell.sourceforge.net/ Does Haskell's FFI make this an easier task than Ocaml's? Cheers, Dario Teixeira ___________________________________________________________ Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/