Browse thread
Does LablTk have a future?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | David Thomas <david_hd@y...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Re: GUI for OCaml |
--- David MENTRE <david.mentre@gmail.com> wrote: > > I would prefer a GUI programming language (similar > > to TeX for word processing). This might be easier > > to develop, can either be static (the widget build > > at compile time) or dynamic, and most of all, it is > > easier to modify an existing GUI. > > I'm not fond of yet another Domain Specific Language > (DSL), except if it brings clear advantages (of which > I'm not yet convinced). I quite like the notion of a DSL for GUIs, presuming that it (1) makes simple things simple, with reasonable defaults for each platform and few if any unpleasant surprises; (2) keeps complicated things possible - we shouldn't be sacrificing flexibility; and (3) is reasonably orthogonal - if the code looks similar, the layout produced should look similar, with only those changes in the gui actually reflected by changes in the code. One additional advantage this has is that it allows GUI work to be done by the people who are good at designing GUI's, rather than those that know the particular system being worked with, without producing a lot of icky code. > BTW, some research has been done one using functional > style to program GUI (in Haskell??). We should at > least have a look on it. That's a good point. I've spent way too long looking at OO examples of GUIs. What does a functional GUI framework look like? ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs