[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: JXTA for ObjC (was: Re: a simple program)
Re: JXTA for ObjC (was: Re: a simple program)
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:43:40 +0000
On Friday, August 17, 2001, at 02:23 PM, Aurelien wrote:
Le vendredi 17 août 2001, à 02:41, Richard Frith-Macdonald a écrit :
I'm not sure I understand this very well. The front-end thus calls the
back-end's drawing routine and the back-end makes callbacks on the
front-end's event handling routines ? So the back-end is just an
abstract layer to the native OS ? I mean, do you have routines like
drawRect (), fillOval, and the like in the back-end, which in turn call
native routines to do it ?
On Friday, August 17, 2001, at 11:27 AM, Aurelien wrote:
Yes something like that ... for the xdps backend, the drawing primitives
map pretty directly
to display postscript commands, while for the xgps backend the dps-like
primitives are mapped
via a drawing engine to xlib commands.
I wasn't talking GTK, but QT (but maybe it's roughly the same thing). I
was under the impression that the most unstable part of GNUstep's work
was the AppKit. I can understand that a not-for-profit effort trying to
create an entire GUI library with support for PostScript is a huge task
and could still take a while before it reaches maturity. My idea is,
provided we set aside the great benefit of having PostScript
everywhere, the use of QT would make GNUstep more readily useable. By
saying <quote>[...] It would gain a certain degree of stability
[...]</quote>, are you acknowledging these assumptions ?
I was meaning that a GTK app writen using the base library was likely to
be more stable than a GTK
app without the base library - as that library provides a good framework
for the non-gui parts of
While it's true that the GNUstep gui is much less stable than the base
library, I'm not sure that
it's much less stable than (say) GTK.
I really know too little about QT to comment on that.
You could also use bundles to write different backends for the GNUstep
gui, but the frontend would
impose a GNUstep look and feel - the backend would be handling only
OK, thus we would have exactly the same application on each and every
platform (what you wish) ?
Yes. At the moment, we have xdps and xgps bundles, for use on x-windows
systems with and without
The frontend has something called NSInterfaceStyle, which can be used
to change the look and feel,
but it requires you to actually implement the code to handle the new
look and feel within the frontend
library, so it's not a great mechanism.
If this was done with QT, which also has the ability to set the
interface style, this could be done once for all platforms. Pardon me
if I'm wrong, this wouldn't require to write anything for the back-end;
this again is already being done by QT.
IU think if you used QT, you wouldn't want to use the gui library at
all, or you would use NSInterfaceStyle to
disable most of the gui library and replace it with QT objects. Using
QT objects would be a completely
different API/programming paradigm to the OpenStep AppKit ... so I think
that trying to combine the two
would probably confuse things.
But that's just what things like QT and GTK are supposed to be - so you
wouldn't need to write a new
gui platform. OK, so they may be much less fully featured than the
AppKit, but I think that's a
If you really want a totally different, native, look and feel
it makes more sense to omit the GNUstep gui and work with the native
gui library directly.
Yes, but that would force the developer to write a GUI/platform.
price you probably have to pay for using them.
PS. Just in case it's not already apparent ... I prefer to use the
GNUstep look and feel on every
system rather than use native look and feel. Even though Apples new
MacOS-X is very pretty, I still
believe that the NeXTstep gui was (a little) prettier (look) and (a
lot) more usable (feel).
Yes, but you cannot just bypass the fact that users are reluctant to
non-native l&f. I myself tend to consider a non-native application as
being amateurish, though I admit this is 100% irrational. Now, talking
personal tastes, I never had the chance to use a NeXT computer, but
from the screenshots you see on gnustep.org, pardon me, but it's making
me sick. In particular, the techy dark gray/black option is
frightening, really. But, again, when I'll have something compiled on
my Linux box, and used it a bit, maybe I'll change my mind...
True ... the great thing about free software is that people can write
their own stuff ...
I'd like people to contribute native look and feel systems - but nobody
(afaik) is working on thatm
and I'm not about to (though I may offer advice).
Re: JXTA for ObjC (was: Re: a simple program),
Richard Frith-Macdonald <=