(That C++ is slower thing again) Re: the damned GUI - was:[PD] Pd in white on black and OSC

Larry Troxler lt at westnet.com
Sat Nov 22 20:49:16 CET 2003

On Saturday 22 November 2003 01:38, Meka[ni] wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:22:14 -0600
> chris clepper <cgc at humboldtblvd.com> wrote:
> 	How about FLTK? It supports OpenGL (if you really want to use it) and is
> very portable (works on Windows, Linux, OSX, *BSD, and maybe more), and
> some of the people I've asked say that it is really fast. I wouldn't know
> how much is it faster (FLTK is the only GUI lib I've ever used), but it is
> one of the smallest GUI libs I've seen.

Of the top of my head, I think FLTK would be a great choice. And, probably 
because it's small, it seemed to me to be easier to learn than the more 
full-featured GUI systems (not that that should be a major factor, mind you).

> Only problem there could be is that
> it is written in C++, so it is not as fast as it can be, but is much easier
> to work with.

Ok, this is what prompted me to post. I thought that this argument finally got 
put to rest years ago. Ok, I'll bite : why would using C++ for a given 
application, result in slower run-time performance than the same thing coded 
in C?


More information about the Pd-list mailing list