KDE 3.0 is Out

Emilio Hansen noted that KDE 3.0 is on their site. There is no official announcement yet, but this looks like the real deal. No debian packages yet, but you can snag RPMs from various distros or src for the do it yourself. Updated by HeUnique:Here is the announcement, enjoy.

Comments

apt-get[able] for Conectiva Linux

[rsd]

KDE 3 is already apt-get_able for Conectiva Linux for a few days

Just make sure you have the snapshot in your /etc/apt/sources.list the lines:

rpm ftp://ftp.nl.linux.org/pub conectiva/snapshot/conectiva main extra orphan gnome experimental games kde
rpm-src ftp://ftp.nl.linux.org/pub conectiva/snapshot/conectiva main extra orphan gnome experimental games kde

then:

apt-get update
apt-get install task-kde
apt-get clean

and go for it.

of course if you are not using the snapshot version yet, you might want to:
apt-get dist-upgrade

Re:What's the correct way to upgrade my KDE?

[ZaMoose]

It's generally a better practice to remove all your previous KDE packages. I've never gotten a -Uvh to work. Crashes, freezes, all sorts of wackiness usually result.

I have been using the KDE3-pre that's included in RH's Skipjack and I do have to say that it appears to be well worth the upgrade. It seems slower to start initially, but once it's running, it seems just fine.

And the xrender menu transparencies finally work (semi)correctly (i.e. less/no annoying menu flicker as it grabs the image behind itself).

At least use a mirror!

[RPoet]

It's not even been announced yet, so please don't take down kde.org by slashdotting it. Use a mirror, list here. I got it from the Norwegian mirror which was very fast for me (I'm in Norway, YMMV, look out your window and check). It's a cool 100 megs though.

Better looking....

[JPriest]

Although I am still working on getting connected the to ftp server and have not yet installed it, I have seen some Screenshots of the 3.0 theme and think it's overall smoother and more professional looking than 2.2.

Re:Valgrind and memory leaks

[swillden]

You've always had to pair allocate/free constructs in C and C++

I haven't done that for years. I just use constructs like the following:

{
auto_ptr<Foo> f = new Foo();
// ....
}

Or, in some rare cases where the lifetime of the object is less obvious:

{
smart_ptr<Foo> f = new Foo();
// ...
}

Add the careful use of auto-destroying and smart pointers to careful implementation of constructors and destructors and memory leaks are a complete non-issue for my C++ code. Using auto and smart pointers inside classes wastes a small amount of memory per instance, but, in many cases, makes default copy ctors and destructors do the Right Thing, reducing programmer error. Same thing works for other resources as well, like file handles, drawing contexts, etc.

Thus requiring consistent use of copy constructors, if only to print a message saying "you didn't really mean to copy me, did you?".

There's a better way. Make a class "Uncopyable", like so:

class Uncopyable
{
public:
Uncopyable() {}
private:
Uncopyable(const Uncopyable&);
void operator=(const Uncopyable&);
};

And provide *no* implementation for the copy ctor and assignment operator. Then, when you have a class that shouldn't be copied, just mix in Uncopyable like so:

#include "uncopyable.h"
class MyClass : Uncopyable
{
//...
};

There you are! Most accidental copies will be flagged by the compiler, because the copy methods of Uncopyable are private. Copies made within, for example, MyClass won't be caught by the compiler, but since there are no implementations of the Uncopyable methods, the linker will barf. This method has zero overhead; the only Uncopyable method that will ever be "called" is the default ctor, and it's empty and inlined. Uncopyable has no virtual functions, so no vtable. Any code that happens to generate calls to the copy ctor or the assignment operator is a bug that will be diagnosed by the linker.