From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7005C820A1 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:22:49 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of p.donadeo@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.216.173; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="p.donadeo@gmail.com"; x-sender="p.donadeo@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of p.donadeo@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.173 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.216.173; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="p.donadeo@gmail.com"; x-sender="p.donadeo@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-qc0-f173.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.216.173; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="p.donadeo@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-qc0-f173.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhICABBuMFLRVditjWdsb2JhbABbgz9Sgyq/NoEUCBYOAQEBAQcLCwkSBiSCJQEBBSMdARseAwwGBQsNAgImAgIiAREBBQEOAQ0GEwmHZgEDDwymPIwAUYMHhCcKGScNZIgmAQUMgR2LbIJcgmmBNAOXeZAJGCmETDo X-IPAS-Result: AhICABBuMFLRVditjWdsb2JhbABbgz9Sgyq/NoEUCBYOAQEBAQcLCwkSBiSCJQEBBSMdARseAwwGBQsNAgImAgIiAREBBQEOAQ0GEwmHZgEDDwymPIwAUYMHhCcKGScNZIgmAQUMgR2LbIJcgmmBNAOXeZAJGCmETDo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,884,1371074400"; d="scan'208";a="26490192" Received: from mail-qc0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 11 Sep 2013 15:22:48 +0200 Received: by mail-qc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id c3so5240248qcv.4 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 06:22:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=l+1LnE0MmwaDdTNinQL9f+f0YeD1ThvhJc7ZzJLeKxo=; b=pGi1GWkc5ysrnx9tTOp0BcggaQKdwdoD5lKp7mwLdI0wSL9gNa9pAjcz4Uo/79e6v3 U/VjWeB49n64gXNP/qGn30/OaOxpziwia2MUAvG7htBFBF2l1xzmQqCpZB1xAN6Fmgjr KmqoDxzLkDNJMZJY1wgJyxAP6YmRfnMSwnNriM4yB1K/NLR8KrZCZ2JMsllJh8JiQjFS Ll6dDbBksAOs8udTA6cdMxhxToG+0bNfrfAdnBcvaUhnTTtFjmXrmLQdfchho2FoAHUJ LBj4+CkznfEFlTHF20ZGBJMO8VJohE363MoLxR3b4DXnPMxFTMq1FfZaP79cVsiT7vyZ WaQA== X-Received: by 10.49.130.162 with SMTP id of2mr3127695qeb.37.1378905767520; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 06:22:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.49.81.7 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 06:22:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130911052437.GA9514@notk.org> References: <20130910230928.2d51cd39@atmarama.noip.me> <20130911052437.GA9514@notk.org> From: Paolo Donadeo Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:22:07 +0200 Message-ID: To: OCaml mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml vs Ada and/or GUI options On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Adrien Nader wrote: > I'm trying to get a list of things that people find bad in (labl)gtk. > Would you be able to put clear words on what you dislike? Very simple. Each and every time I open the GTK API reference [1] I feel like being catapulted in a distopian world, where nothing is clear. Compare with the documentation of QT. Second, I notice that there isn't a single GTK program with a decent GUI, from the look and feel point of view. I use GTK programs everyday (as a Linux user) but this doesn't mean I don't consider it essentially... ugly. Compare with the average GUIs of an average OSX application, but even Windows is probably better and more refined. It's *NOT* a problem with LablGTK, but with GTK itself. And of course this is a personal opinion, with no intention to be the "truth". [1] for example: http://www.gtk.org/api/2.6/gtk/gtk-General.html -- Paolo