They're improving the file dialogs...
by
Lisandro
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
...which is good. The file chooser improved a lot on GTK2, but it could still use some polish.
BTW, does anyone knows if GTK supports the Composite render extension available on X.ORG? Or perhaps it has nothing to do with it and doesn't need it? I tried enabling compositing on XFCE 4.2rc2, and while the desktop looked MUCH better (with true transparency, window shadows and the works), it slowed my system to a crawl.
Re:They're improving the file dialogs...
by
flithm
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Just so people don't get the wrong idea about Composite or Xorg, on my relatively modern (but by no means uber) computer xorg + composite + translucency + drop shadows doesn't slow it down one bit. In fact with all the effects on the windows actually appear to slide around smoother than they did before, although I'm sure this some kind of psychological effect.
Also of note is that I have one graphics card driving two monitors, and it's still not an issue.
Don't be afraid to try Composite on Xorg! And if you run into problems submit bug reports! Xorg has great promise. Let's all help to make it as good as it could be (and no I'm in no way related to the Xorg project. I just think eye-candy is where its at).
Re:They're improving the file dialogs...
by
Pflipp
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Put differently, the file chooser hasn't been fucked up more since Eugenia started her contest. I hate not being able to do a tab-based regexp search, as common in ye olde GTK+. Yet, patience may be the solution.
-- "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
I love Gnome and GTK
by
bonch
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
...but when are they going to just go full-on GTK# running on a Mono framework?:D
Beat Microsoft at its own.NET game.
Re:I love Gnome and GTK
by
aldoman
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
But how long do we as an OSS community stop very new and exciting development in the premise of 'it doesn't work on 0.5% of systems'?!
Linux _desperately_ needs to have a working, easy to use RAD environment. Something as simple, or simpler than Visual Basic. I want to be able to create a simple Linux application by dragging and dropping some form elements onto a page and double clicking on a button and typing a few lines of simple code and have it all working.
Glade is good, but it's not easy enough.
Mono has the possibility of bringing this to fruition. I want to see sharpdevelop making good GTK# apps in a few hours.
Re:I love Gnome and GTK
by
binner1
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
One thing that will really screw up the VB crowd moving to GTK+ is the way that windows are designed. Designing a window for GTK/Gnome (optionally using Glade) means building a hierarcy of widgets in containers. In Windows with VB, you just put the widget where you want it.
GTK/Gnome is more 'difficult'** up front but reduces the work by the programmer when it comes to resizing a window. Windows is 'easier' up front but makes the programmer painfully aware of the location of widgets after the fact (window resizing, etc).
Personally, once you've gotten over the 'lack of free form design' shock, I like the GTK/Gnome approach much better.
**I haven't coded anything for Windows in a few years, so things may have changed with.Net and WinForms (?) in the meantime. I also don't think the GTK way is difficult...it's just different.
-Ben
Re:I love Gnome and GTK
by
Late
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"I haven't coded anything for Windows in a few years, so things may have changed with.Net and WinForms (?) in the meantime."
Not really. WinForms has a sensible class structure and generally cleaner design than MFC, but basic positioning is still considered more or less absolute.
Where I work we have bought and external toolkit (Syncfusion) which offers layout managers and then we just use gridbadlayout just like most Java developers do. Syncfusion would integrate nicely into the Windows Form designer for drag and drop, but we have chosen to create a simple XML description language and generate the user interfaces from description files (with a preview tool of course).
Speed improvements
by
arvindn
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Some X protocol round trip reduction improvements have made it to this release, so if you've been frustrated by a gnome program over an ssh session taking 30 seconds to start (I sure have!) then 2.6 will probably speed things up.
Re:Better for windows users now
by
msaavedra
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The difference between Wimp and other GTK engines is that it uses the windows GUI engine to draw most things, so they are identical to the native windows controls. It does a better job of this in Windows XP than in previous versions, though. Wimp still causes quite a bit of pain in Windows 98.
As for wxPython, I've switched away from that to pyGTK, for a couple of reasons. First, the stable version of Wx uses a really ancient version of GTK on unix. Second, I really disliked the API. I have heard that it is similar in style to MFC, and if that is the case, I'm glad I've been able to stay away from Windows-only programming as long as I have.
--
"Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
--Henry David Thoreau
Two Questions
by
KidSock
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
On Windows, if you type a sequence of characters quickly in a list control (such as in a file dialog) the focus jumps to an item that begins with those letters. Will GTK every implement that?
Also, is there is a way to change the standard file dialog without recompiling everything? I want to set my own custom file dialog.
What are the others? Fltk isn't what I'd call industrial-strength; Qt is in some cases neither open-source nor free-of-cost.
Re:only Qt/X11 and Qt/Mac are GPL'd
by
Al+Dimond
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've always wondered about that... would it be legal for somebody to take the Qt/X11 code or the Qt/Mac code and make a GLP'd Qt/Win version? If Qt/X11 and Qt/Mac are GPL one would think it should be legal, anyhow.
Not that it would be easy, or any more necessary than the Windows port of GTK+ (which is nice sometimes but certainly not necessary to have a running Windows system), just possible.
Re:No matter how hard C is, gtk/glib is impressive
by
drooling-dog
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Use gtkmm.
Indeed. It's a very nice implementation, and much cleaner than the underlying GTK+ interface. I'm surprised that it isn't used more widely than it is.
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, does anyone knows if GTK supports the Composite render extension available on X.ORG? Or perhaps it has nothing to do with it and doesn't need it? I tried enabling compositing on XFCE 4.2rc2, and while the desktop looked MUCH better (with true transparency, window shadows and the works), it slowed my system to a crawl.
...but when are they going to just go full-on GTK# running on a Mono framework? :D
.NET game.
Beat Microsoft at its own
Some X protocol round trip reduction improvements have made it to this release, so if you've been frustrated by a gnome program over an ssh session taking 30 seconds to start (I sure have!) then 2.6 will probably speed things up.
The difference between Wimp and other GTK engines is that it uses the windows GUI engine to draw most things, so they are identical to the native windows controls. It does a better job of this in Windows XP than in previous versions, though. Wimp still causes quite a bit of pain in Windows 98. As for wxPython, I've switched away from that to pyGTK, for a couple of reasons. First, the stable version of Wx uses a really ancient version of GTK on unix. Second, I really disliked the API. I have heard that it is similar in style to MFC, and if that is the case, I'm glad I've been able to stay away from Windows-only programming as long as I have.
"Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
--Henry David Thoreau
On Windows, if you type a sequence of characters quickly in a list control (such as in a file dialog) the focus jumps to an item that begins with those letters. Will GTK every implement that?
Also, is there is a way to change the standard file dialog without recompiling everything? I want to set my own custom file dialog.
What are the others? Fltk isn't what I'd call industrial-strength; Qt is in some cases neither open-source nor free-of-cost.
I've always wondered about that... would it be legal for somebody to take the Qt/X11 code or the Qt/Mac code and make a GLP'd Qt/Win version? If Qt/X11 and Qt/Mac are GPL one would think it should be legal, anyhow.
Not that it would be easy, or any more necessary than the Windows port of GTK+ (which is nice sometimes but certainly not necessary to have a running Windows system), just possible.
Indeed. It's a very nice implementation, and much cleaner than the underlying GTK+ interface. I'm surprised that it isn't used more widely than it is.