Re: gtkmm capabilities

[Roel Vanhout <roel riks nl>]

Russell Shaw wrote:
> Roel Vanhout wrote:
> > > The main problem with gtk is that there's no central point of all
> > > the information you need to completely understand it.
> > > GObject, GType and signals take a long time to learn, and i only
> > > did that after reading the gtk lists for months. This probably
> > > doesn't matter as much with gtkmm which has C++ objects.
> > > The gtk source also has an examples directory for testing lots
> > > of functionality, but it doesn't help a lot for someone trying
> > > to learn the basics.
> > That's exactly what my point was: the time it takes to get up to 
> > speed, and the time you need to invest to keep up, easily costs a 
> > multiple of the 3000$ this whole discussion is about.
> I found that once you understand how it works, you can keep up to
> date easily just by seeing new widgets on a mailing list. The upfront
> learning curve is *high*, but i don't care about how long it takes
> something to learn if i know it will be useful. (most ppl object
> to long learning curves)
> Being hobbyists, who cares about monetary time value;)
> Once you figure it out, it's easier to use.

Indeed, that's what I said: hobby-economy is completely different from 
business-economy. In businesses, peoples time costs money, so if it 
takes 4 or 5 days longer to learn gtkmm (compared to Qt), gtkmm is more 
expensive than Qt is. If I had to tell my boss or a customer 'well, I'll 
have to learn this new thing, I'm not sure how long it will take' (to 
quote you: "i don't care about how long it takes something to learn if i 
know it will be useful"), then that's just not an acceptable answer. 
OTOH, if I'm writing code for fun, and I know that my coding will be 
more fun when I use gtkmm, then all the time that is spend to learn 
gtkmm (and everything around it) is justifiable (sp?).
Also, what this whole thing started with: the OP saying that 3000$ is 
expensive. I just tried to put that into perspective.

cheers,

roel