Re: Appreciation / Financial support

[David Kastrup]

Jeff Barnes <address@hidden> writes:

> From: Tim Roberts

>> In what way does Qt represent an "extension strategy"?
>
> Using C++ to extend Lily.

C++ is not useful for extending LilyPond.  It is its skeleton substance,
but is not user serviceable.  Qt would not change that.

> With the benefit that there are readily available language bindings to
> popular languages.

There seems little point in using Qt for accessing the popular
languages.

>> However, this debate is now taking a nasty side-trip into religion,
>> and that isn't going to help anyone.
>
> It was not my intent to get religious. Please show me where I was
> religious about Qt and I will gladly recant.

Religion is about belief.  Port some significant subsystem of LilyPond
to your idea of Qt usage, and you have actual substance to talk about
rather than belief.

-- 
David Kastrup