Re: [glade--] error of FC2 and glade--?

Murray Cumming schrieb:
> Or, Anjuta should allow you to choose not to use glademm. I think that
> later versions of anjuta have this option.

Or to put it positively: Choose to use libglademm instead of glademm.

> It is wrong of Anjuta to suggest that glademm is necessary for gtkmm or
> gnomemm development. libglademm, however, is very appropriate.

Since you keep telling people to prefer libglademm (your code) without 
looking at glademm (my code), I want to emphasize that both have their 
value, you simply have to choose. ;-)

Perhaps the following questions might help the decision (and should get 
onto glademm's web page):

- do you want your users to be able to modify the UI?
	yes: libglademm		no: glademm
- do you want to ship a single binary without external dependancies?
	yes: glademm		no: libglademm
   [glademm can embed icons]
- do you want compile time checking for the user interface structure?
	yes: glademm		no: libglademm

pros of libglademm
- ability to change the user interface without recompilation
- reliable gnome2 support

pros of glademm
- gives you a ready to compile project skeleton (which might use libglademm)
cons of glademm
- every change to the UI needs recompilation (and might even need 
modification user defined classes [new callbacks])

    Christof

_______________________________________________
glademm-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/glademm-list

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFA5V6ung+R+0ucfO0RAigvAJ9Q2KPFnuh9zdnYmNKT7cv2Su8/rACcCueh
mkij0LsVgMgxqgPpz6DIJdE=
=XR/c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----