On Dec 11, 2007 11:10 PM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jason Sewall <jasonsewall@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Anyway, ugit is very good for a first draft; its text display beats > > whats in git-gui in a big way (and I would *hope* qt4 would beat > > Tcl/Tk at that at least). > > Are you just using the wrong fonts under git-gui? I mean both > Tk and qt4 are drawing text through your windowing system, from > the same pool of font files... if qt4 can draw nice text then > so can Tk, right? I don't know much about graphical toolkits and the like, but I think that the more modern ones have fancy features like antialiasing and subpixel rendering, which makes a big difference when you're working on a laptop with a tiny screen. Take a look for yourself: http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/492/comparejd6.png They are obviously using different fonts there (because I can't figure out what font ugit is using) but there is a difference in rendering quality to be sure. The qt stuff fits better with the rest of my system better too (even though I'm using gnome) - it's entirely the result of Tk being lightweight and a million years old, when UI conventions were different (like every menu being detachable, and antique scrollbars). I'm not here to start a toolkit flame war (we had a toolkit dogpile on the list last week, I think) I'm just pointing out that Tk is from a different era. I use git-gui and gitk for my git graphical needs because they rock and at the end of the day, the fonts and antialiasing aren't that big of a deal, especially since I'm usually doing quick scans and searches over the information those tools display, not reading novels in them. Jason - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
