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: | Chris Campbell <cyberdanx@g...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Does LablTk have a future? |
[forgot to cc list] On 30/08/05, Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > > I had better clarify before continuing. I see two viable approaches here: > > 1. Write OCaml bindings to the native GUIs and then an OCaml wrapper that > abstracts the nativeness away. > > 2. Write a new widget toolkit designed to render via OpenGL. > ... > If we do (1) then it will handle skinning and the intersection of the sets of > functionality of the native GUIs. > > If we do (2) then customisation and skinning will be ignored but you have the > advantage of real time 2D and 3D graphics. > > Option (2) seems much easier and more useful to me. I've never cared about > skinning... Easier??? You'd need to build a complete event/messaging subsystem, a renderer, ..., a set of widgets and get people to ship it. Plus it'd likely only run on Linux and BSD. What about OSX Mac/Windows? It's not easier at all especially if it was to be anything like a modern day gui - think Quartz Extreme/Aqua or AeroGlass. IIRC the plan for Gtk+ is to go this route too using Cairo. Despite hating Gtk, it'd be better to rely on them for the gui and wrap it with something like your description of a "functional GUI" or bind to WxWidgets (or both). There's also enlightenment as an alternative for Linux users.