Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] [Q]: Co(ntra)variance and subtyping?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2001-11-22 (00:38)
From: Vitaly Lugovsky <vsl@o...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Kylix and OCaml
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Christophe Raffalli wrote:

> Vitaly Lugovsky a écrit :

> > > A friend of mine showed me Kylix (see Borland's home page:
> > > It looks great to create
> > > user interfaces.
> > 
> >  It is an illusion. Don't believe your eyes. Tools like Delphi/Kylix/...
> > will not help you at all - it's much faster to write an UI in Tk by hands
> > then using such a WYSIWIG.
> I will not comment for Kylix ... But I was a user of the not very unfamous
> SUIT. And I can tell you are wrong. SUIT was design with two ideas:
> - use real number for sizes to allow scaling (that was not really a good idea)

 In this case you sould have a WYSIWYG tool. But containers approach
is much better: you don't need to know anything about sizes - just do a 
widgets placing - pack them in lines, tables, lists, may be using a kinda
boxes and glue approach like in TeX...

> >  Why do you want such a havy and thick GUI layer? GUI is for scripts!
> > Use Wish, it's portable. Much more portable, then Bugland tools.
> Kylix is in fact quite responsive and light (working on powerless PCs).

 Hm... 500MHz Pentium-II is powerless? Be realistic...

> If you mean heavy because the professionnal edition has numerous widget (like
> every thing to write a database client or a web browser in a couple of
> minutes). In fact I am quite amased with the speed for a package of 120Mo when
> installed for the pro version (I think that the 120Mo are mainly the widgets
> and examples). It shows that it is well implemented (other software like
> star-office let you see that they are big !)

 And you really want to produce a native compiled n-megabytes monster for
any small dialog? Why? Nothing can be lighter then scripts.
> But then I agree that they may be other solutions using a language to describe
> the interface. 

 And this solution is much better and elegant. ;)

> But what are the solutions (language or WYSIWIG) immediately available for
> OCaml ?

 Tcl/Tk. Write your GUI in Tcl, and connect it to your OCaml application.
Application logic really MUST be separated from GUI, even if you only
calculates "2+2".

> Are they complete (how many kind of widgets supported ?)

 Tk is a very old and widespread toolkit, so, I think, you will find
anything you want there.

Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: