[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde
Subject:    Re: Qt vs. Motif speed [was Re: Two questions]
From:       Sirtaj Singh Kang <ssk () physics ! unimelb ! edu ! au>
Date:       1997-08-31 20:34:39
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sat, 30 Aug 1997, Jonathan A. Buzzard wrote:

> Compaired Word with what to say it's slow. The lack of i18n is a serious
> drawback to Qt, it does not impinge directly on me as my first language
> is English, but for others it is a problem. The lack of full DnD in Qt
> is also a downer.
> 
> The speed advantage will be lost as soon as Qt aquires these additions,
> which it surely will.

I honestly, honestly doubt that DnD and 16-bit chars will negate my
perceived difference in speeds between Qt and Motif. At best, large
characters = more memory moved around, but unless we are dealing with very
large blocks of text, memcpy or traversal of int * opposed to char *
(remember, it only affects text processing) by a 32/64 bit microprocessor
is not going to cost much. 

As far as Dnd is concerned... Motif on linux still does _less_ DnD than
kdehelp (if any at all); try dragging a link with kdehelp... then try it
with Netscape 3.01). It's not as if insertion of the ABILITY to do DnD is
going to slow everything down just because it is there.

Maybe they will. Maybe DnD and 16-bit chars will slow Qt down to a crawl,
or even enough for me to notice. But I'll believe it when I see it. 

-Taj.

Sirtaj S. Kang       taj@kde.org         ssk@physics.unimelb.edu.au
School of Physics    Univ of Melbourne   http://www.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~ssk/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]