Qtopia coming for Neo1973

Ted Lemon mellon at fugue.com
Tue Sep 25 18:42:36 CEST 2007

On Sep 25, 2007, at 6:26 AM, Carlo E. Prelz wrote:
> As far as I can perceive, making a c wrapper of a c++ library (and I
> do not mean c-looking code that compiles under c++ - I mean a library
> that makes heavy use of those ungodly quirks that c++ is burdened
> with) is a task that no sane individual might desire to embark
> into... But if/when such a wrapper becomes available, I will make sure
> to carve out half a day to gain some experience with it.

I don't trust this statement.   You say that C++ is burdened with  
ungodly quirks.   I hated C++ for a long time.   I believed the  
received wisdom that it was quirky and evil.   I avoided it like the  
plague.   C++ was what Windows people programmed in, not Free  
Software people.   But at some point about two years back I really  
needed a decent cross-platform toolkit that actually looked good on  
all three platforms, and Qt was the only option.   So I was forced to  
learn C++.   It turns out that after I got over the learning curve,  
it was actually pretty cool.   Just because some people who use it  
abuse it doesn't mean that it's not useful.   I don't have a  
preference for C++ at this point, but I can use it if I need it, and  
have used it on a number of occasions where it made sense.    
Personally I prefer LISP.

So when you say Qt is bad because there's no C API, I am able to look  
at your assertion from a position of knowledge.   And that's why I  
say it's pathetic.   It's not that you're a bad person.   It's that  
you're a blind person trying to tell sighted people why they should  
only walk close to the wall if they don't want to get lost.   You  
just shouldn't do that - if you don't know anything about something,  
don't speak as if you are an authority.   There'd be a lot less  
flaming on virtually every mailing list if people would just not  
speak when they don't know anything useful about what they are saying.

> I still prefer the look of Gnome to that of KDE, but this is purely an
> aesthetical judgment. I expect that with some effort I would be  
> able to
> use Gnome themes on KDE.

Again, this is a valid criticism, although I will say that I pretty  
much despise KDE, despite being quite fond of Qt.   OTOH, I despise  
gnome too.   Neither one works very well.   I agree that gnome looks  
better, but since my criterion for something being good is that it  
must work, the fact that gnome looks better doesn't help me.   When  
it starts working better, the fact that it looks better will be more  

> Hrmpf. How many X applications can you find in sourceforge?

Who cares?   You're writing a new application, you said.   So what  
you care about is how quickly you can get from a design to an  
implementation.   This has *nothing* to do with whether you are using  
X or a raw framebuffer.   It has to do with how usable the toolkit  
is.   This is why your statement is nonsense.   True, if you want to  
get xterm working on Qtopia, that will be more work than getting it  
working on gnome, because it shares the same underlying windowing  
system, X.   But that's got nothing to do with developing.   If you  
want to develop something new, starting from the xterm source code  
would be suicidal.   There's already a KDE terminal emulator - if you  
decide to use Qt, you can start from that.   So which windowing  
system is underneath the many layers of the GUI toolkit really isn't  

>> Have you actually tried to develop an app for
>> Openmoko yet?
> No, since I do not have an openmoko.

In other words, you are talking out your hat.

> PS In your mail, you wrote 1) that I use pathetic excuses, 2) that I
> have complete lack of knowledge on topics that I write my prose about,
> 3) that I say things that I don't know to be true, 4) that I make
> multiple stunningly ignorant statements. Can you please keep these
> personal observations out of the conversation? Just for the sake of
> peace and harmony...

I'd like us to reach peace and harmony by not repeating prejudices.    
I like the look of openmoko better than the look of qtopia - I'm  
totally rooting for openmoko to get to a place where it's usable.    
But I find Qt to be very useable.   You've made a bunch of assertions  
about why it isn't useable, despite having no experience using it,  
and despite having no experience developing for openmoko.

I am criticizing your arguments, not you.   If you go off and spend a  
week learning enough C++ to use Qt, and then writing a real app in  
Qt, and then you come back and say "I like Gtk better, and here's  
why" then I'm interested in hearing what you have to say.   Until  
that time, you shouldn't go around telling people that Qt isn't a  
good choice, or that Gtk is better.   Because you don't know.

Sorry to be such a windbag.

More information about the community mailing list