Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 4th Oct 2010 08:45 UTC, submitted by kragil
Window Managers So, yeah, it's been ten years in the making, including a number of rewrites, but the day has finally come: the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries, which, surprisingly enough, form the foundation of, among other things, Enlightenment, have reached beta status. This is a major step towards the final release of Enlightenment DR17, which should hit before year's end.
Thread beginning with comment 443853
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: another 'c' toolkit
by bnolsen on Tue 5th Oct 2010 14:18 UTC in reply to "RE: another 'c' toolkit"
bnolsen
Member since:
2006-01-06

QT isn't light weight c++. It's the epitome of bloat. Look at something more like fltk for something light weight that can be done with c++

Looking at the api it looks like emulating c++ objects with 'c'. Noting all the c style namespacing there's another low hanging fruit. Not to mention the function calls with 15+ arguments.

Edited 2010-10-05 14:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: another 'c' toolkit
by dcaro on Tue 5th Oct 2010 17:35 in reply to "RE[2]: another 'c' toolkit"
dcaro Member since:
2010-01-05

"Looking at the api it looks like emulating c++ objects with 'c'."

There is only 1 object : Evas_Object. That's all. And you say it emulates c++ objects ? Seriously...

"Noting all the c style namespacing there's another low hanging fruit. Not to mention the function calls with 15+ arguments."

If for you C++ is namespace and some (few) functions that take more than 10 parameters, you have a bad idea of C++. Talk about heritage, polymorphism, exceptions, template, etc... That's C++. And all that stuff cost. C++ can be light but then slower than C. It can beat C in speed using meta programmation maybe but then the memory consumption is quite high.

We have chosen C for several good reasons. That's a design choice.

Reply Parent Score: 1