Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Jan 2011 22:18 UTC, submitted by alinandrei
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu De kogel is door de kerk. After years of focussing entirely on Gtk+ and GNOME, Ubuntu will finally start evaluating Qt applications for inclusion in the defaukt Ubuntu installation. Mark Shuttleworth announced the policy change on his blog today.
Thread beginning with comment 459116
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Talk about arrogance
by Richard Dale on Wed 19th Jan 2011 19:35 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Talk about arrogance"
Richard Dale
Member since:
2005-07-22

KConfig is an order of magnitude faster than QSettings, and a couple of orders of magnitude faster than DConf. The suggestion of merging configuration backends have been suggested before, and the result was:

* GNOME solution is not good enough for KDE
* GNOME refuses to use the C++ implementation, KDE uses
* KDE doesn't care to port a C++ implementation to C, just because GNOME are being silly

Of course now that GNOME are starting to use C++ through Qt, the pedantic argument that has previously prevented any KDE technology from being adopted by GNOME could finally go away.


KConfig is pretty hostile in terms of non-C++ language bindings. It uses method overloading on const-ness which no language other than C++ supports. It exposes C++ smart pointers in the public api, when they should only be in the private d-pointers. The KConfigXT api exposes references to primitive variables which must be passed to the methods. This is a nightmare for language bindings and applications like Plasma which have to jump through some incredibly complex hoops in order to get something which should be really simple to actually work.

The Ubuntu dconf Qt bindings are QML based and just mean setting properties on a QObject which is way easier to implement in non-C++ language bindings. I don't know if it is possible to map the full complexity of KConfig onto a QML based api, but I do know that the Plasma team are starting to do that. So what I would like to see is a QML api that sets properties on instances in the same way for both KDE and Ubuntu settings.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[10]: Talk about arrogance
by oiaohm on Wed 19th Jan 2011 21:59 in reply to "RE[9]: Talk about arrogance"
oiaohm Member since:
2009-05-30


KConfig is pretty hostile in terms of non-C++ language bindings. It uses method overloading on const-ness which no language other than C++ supports. It exposes C++ smart pointers in the public api, when they should only be in the private d-pointers. The KConfigXT api exposes references to primitive variables which must be passed to the methods. This is a nightmare for language bindings and applications like Plasma which have to jump through some incredibly complex hoops in order to get something which should be really simple to actually work.

The Ubuntu dconf Qt bindings are QML based and just mean setting properties on a QObject which is way easier to implement in non-C++ language bindings. I don't know if it is possible to map the full complexity of KConfig onto a QML based api, but I do know that the Plasma team are starting to do that. So what I would like to see is a QML api that sets properties on instances in the same way for both KDE and Ubuntu settings.


What are you trying do. Send us around tree. KDE and Gnome Setting are enough of a headache. Now a third form.

Serious-ally this is not something a distribution should try to solve alone. Instead this should be going through proper standard making process.

We need a proper solution not someone just going Ok lets do this without standard process adding another layer of mess. It is bad enough now.

Ok what about wine integration what about fltk integration and the list goes on. GTK and QT are the major toolkits on Linux but there are quite a few minor toolkits.

If you are talking about constancy of interface you need a standard that covers them all.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[11]: Talk about arrogance
by phoenix on Fri 21st Jan 2011 19:31 in reply to "RE[10]: Talk about arrogance"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Hear, hear!!

And if the existing standards aren't good enough, then work with the stakeholders to improve them.

Edited 2011-01-21 19:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2