[Xfc-dev] XFCE Foundation Classes alive ??

[Moses O McKnight]

I have started using FLTK 1.3 for some stuff and find it to be quite
useful.  Very lightweight and fast, and actively developed.  Much
lighter weight than GTK+, and cross-platform too.

Moses

On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 09:38 +0200, Kent Asplund wrote:
> I should have sent a mail I guess but I was only interested in seeing
> if there was any active development.
> 
> I am much for lightweight and do not like that we programmers are using
> up the advances in computer technology in a more engineers improving it.
> On the other hand I am very much for OOP and making things robust and
> easy to maintain. These two seems to be slightly in conflict.
> 
> On my spare time I am making a program for keeping track of time spent
> on projects/tasks: TimeIT (https://launchpad.net/timeit). This program
> is made primarily to be easy to use and do things automatically. 
> 
> TimeIT is made with gtkmm and I found a few things I did not like.
> 
> 1 gtkmm seems to be monolithic, you always get everything. (My program
>   needed 26Mb running, not only the fault of gtkmm of course)
> 2 gtkmm is using sigc++
> 3 gtkmm did not fell 100% reliable. (Destruction sometimes happened in
> wrong order when using gtkmm smart pointers).
> 
> #3 Is something that you can live with. It is much better than Windows Forms anyway.
> #2 sigc++ is great and safe implementation the of observer pattern but it tends to draw the attention away from designing interfaces and the relation between the objects.
> #1 Memory usage: Here is something that might be done something about. 
> 
> So, noticing that Xfc is still having some life maybe I should try it
> and see what end result it would be. 
> It would at least be nice to make some benchmarks comparing Xfc and
> gtkmm memory usage. It would be something nice for you to have on the
> homepage anyway. Is there some other reasons to choose Xfc over gtkmm? 
> I think you need a section on your homepage describing why choosing
> "your" framework instead of others.
> 
> End of rambling
> /Kent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 22:01:20 +0200
> Bo Lorentsen <bl at lue.dk> wrote:
> 
> > On 10/22/2010 11:45 AM, Kent Asplund wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> I have spent some time trying to learn XFC and I really like it so far.
> > >> Now I have upgraded to XUbuntu 10.10 and can't find any of the
> > >> libraries in the Synaptic any more.
> > >> Is this a dead project ??
> > >>      
> > > I have been waiting on this mailinglist for activites for months, I had
> > > actually forgotten that I was on it. I would suspect that nothing
> > > happens.
> > >    
> > Hmm, if only I knew :-)
> > 
> > XFC is not dead, but more in some kind of hyper sleep. I have been using 
> > it for some projects, and I maintain the current code bare in my spare 
> > time, and some things may be missing but I am don't miss anything yet.
> > 
> > Please let me know if anything is needed or if you have anything to 
> > contribute, and maybe we can wake up XFC of its current sleep, I really 
> > like to see some life in this fine framework.
> > 
> > /BL
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xfc-dev mailing list
> > Xfc-dev at xfce.org
> > http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfc-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xfc-dev mailing list
> Xfc-dev at xfce.org
> http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfc-dev