That sounds pretty good. Is that a lot like python and gtk? I get the impression its better since I don't think python compiles to equivolent c code? Thanks, Steve |
| Am 12.11.2013 05:52, schrieb Steven Blatnick: > > By the way, I should point out that these remarks also apply to the > geany direction thread. I also should point out this doesn't > necessarily mean I'm opposed to vala, I'm just expressing concerns. > > From this thread, it sounds like vala binds pretty well to C++ like > python does, but also doesn't add bloat while simplifying the code. I > don't think I've noticed python doing much to simplify gtk-centric > code though, so would vala do better? If changing to vala is like > changing to python, I'd be more inclined against it, although it would > be good exerience to gain. > > Thanks for all the replies :-) > Vala has the advantage that it compiles down to plain C code. Thus you can trivially call code written in Vala from "legacy" C code. This is also true for C++ (or some subset of it) but not for other languages which need a more complex foreign language interface. Therefore, if we want to switch to a higher level language without re-write (we don't have the man power for a rewrite) C++ and Vala are good candidates. Best regards. _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel |