On 25/07/2015 10:23, Jaromil wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jul 2015, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
>>>> I imagine the reason why Glib was written in C is because binding to
>>>> other languages is easier with C than C++.
>>>>
>>> I expect so. C is fairly straightforward.
>>
>> This was certainly the original intent. But having used the bindings,
>> my experience was that they were of wildly variable quality, had
>> varying degrees of wrapper coverage, and some were not exactly usable.
>> All in all, the number of production quality bindings could be counted
>> on one hand with some fingers to spare. Maybe it's improved since I
>> last looked.
>
> I share most of the criticism to GTK in this thread. I think the best
> thing it really produced was glade/libglade, but then is it worthed?

Glade and libglade were very nice, and I used to use these extensively.
However, I still ran into nasty bugs here. For example, if you load a
glade widget tree and reparent into a custom widget, it loses all the
accelerators (keyboard bindings). And there were issues with the
libglade bindings as well, both bugs and defects such as not being able
to use signal autoconnection. And later they made an incompatible break
with GtkBuilder with then with GTK+3, which was the final straw in
dropping GTK+ for good.


Regards,
Roger