(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
Sun Nov 23 11:57:09 CET 2003

On Saturday 22 November 2003 19:17, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 02:49:16PM -0500, Larry Troxler wrote:
> > Of the top of my head, I think FLTK 
> It's small enough to be statically linked (<100K!), and the latest cvs
> version support "themes", the holly grail of sexiness for all those non PD
> users out there. No wonder why themes are sometimes called "skins"...

Oh rackum frackum - even FLTK is doing this now? I guess all the actual bugs 
in software must have been found and corrected if the programmers have time 
for this.

> > 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?
> C++ is a kludge, but not always a bad one.

Yeah, whatever. I hope you realize that you answered some totally unasked 
question, that is completely independent of your initial assertion, namely 
that C++ is slow. 

Yes, I agree C++ is a kludge, and not always a bad one. 

I don't agree that for an equivalent program, it is slower than C. I was 
actually optimistic that you would actually provide some examples (I don't 
mind at all being proved wrong).

> Fltk is a good example.
> I just compiled version 2-cvs, and the examples are very convincing.

Good. I'm glad you like it  :-)

But perhaps you should spend a bit of time with it, together with some C++ 




More information about the Pd-list mailing list