Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th Feb 2010 13:23 UTC, submitted by kragil
Permalink for comment 408527
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-22
Why would anyone use C# for Qt, when there are perfectly good Qt bindings for Python, C, C++, Ruby and Java?
If you have Qt libraries installed, why would you bother also with Mono?
Hence, KDE doesn't need C# and Mono at all, there is no point. "
Because C# and other CLR based languages in the Mono environment are interesting to program in?
C# is hardly very similar to Ruby or Python. The are no current C bindings.
Many programmers prefer C# over Java, and they are more different than a lot of people would have you believe.
I personally think C# and the Qt/KDE apis are a nice fit, as to me C# feels like a cleaned up C++. For instance, in Qyoto we map Qt's Q_PROPERTYs directly onto C# properties, instead of needing the moc pre-processor as in C++.