Re: [rgui-dev] RE: Backend Debouch

[Tom Sawyer]

Laurent,

first let me tahnk you for all your input. i think the SWT idea is a
very smart, practical and plausble appraoch and if i can orgianize the
logistics of accomplishing it, then i think it a worthy of pursuit that
we may take. i would say that, at this moment, i am squarely in the
middle of this and could go either way depending.

so it is important that i hear the opinions of our other members first,
before i make any such major decisions.

in the mean time i will continue the course of action i am taking now
and see how well it pans out, as you suggest. perhaps when you get a
chance you can check out the code. granted it is primitave now, but it
actually produces simple working (mostly) GUIs.

~tom


On Tue, 2002-08-27 at 09:09, Laurent Julliard wrote:
> Tom Sawyer wrote:
> > NOTICE TO ALL GUTOPIANS: THIS IS AN IMPORTANT THREAD, SOME ADDITIONAL
> > INPUT WOULD BE VERY USEFUL. PLEASE EXPRESS YOUR OPINION AS THIS COULD
> > FUNDEMENTALLY CHANGE HOW WE PROCEED.
> > 
> 
> Cannot agree more ;-) If one day my advice prove to be pure crap a 
> couple of people will probably come to me and ask a few questions....
> 
> > 
> > hmmm...so back to the main point: SWT C source versus using Ruby-Gnome,
> > SWin/VRuby, and RubyCocoa/RubyAEOSA. okay, here are, point by point, the
> > questions i need answered:
> > 
> > * who will do the "JNI" C translation for Ruby. i fear it is out of my
> > league, as i haven't used C for over 10 years.
> > 
> > * if we use SWT who will build the respective GUtopIa backend
> > interfaces? I can hadle one of them (GTK's) while i hammer out the the
> > primary meta-api, like i'm doing presently, but not all.
> > 
> 
> You know what. Take the lazy path for now. See if the existing MSwin and 
> GTK backend can be used for an SWT like approach. If it works then fine 
> keep them. If you realize in the course of this first prototype that it 
> requires too many changes or doesn fit well with the SWT approach then 
> you know what to do.
> 
> > * how do we integrate ParaGUI, Wise, or other backends if we use SWT?
> > 
> 
> As I said once you have proven the GuTopia approach is the right one I 
> expect ParaGUI, Wise and other backends author to maintain the GUTOPIA 
> backend
> 
> > * finally, is licensing an issue?
> > 
> 
> You mean, is GPL an issue ?? :-) You are going for GPL right (or may be 
> LGPL)
> 
> > ~tom
> > 
> > p.s. i read most of those readings you linked for me and also looked at
> > the java code a bit. they make some fair arguments and i have already
> > implemented some of those notions into gutopia. the java code is quite
> > large, just a single widget had what appeared to be some odd thousnad
> > lines of code. is this perhaps due to the one-to-one correlations? well,
> > there was a lot of remarked docs in there too, so i'm sure that counts
> > for a good bit. it just seems rather large to me, but perhaps that's
> > just how it ends up when complete and i'm being nieve.
> > 
> 
> It is a big thing but but as you said it is also a piece of literacy :-) 
>   Don't let the size impress you. Their approach is very mechanical as I 
> said and it probably generates under-optimized code here and there. But 
> as I said this is on purpose. They wanted the low level stuff to be 
> simple-stupid and based on uniform interfacing and coding principle. In 
> some way they applied the famous POLS principle.
> 
> Keep going, start something... and more people will join.
> 
> Laurent
> -- 
> Laurent JULLIARD - Xerox R&T/SSTC/XPA - Open Source team
>  >> Host your Xerox Software project on CodeX: http://codex.xerox.com
>  >> address@hidden community: http://xww.linux.world.xerox.com
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gutopia-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.freesoftware.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutopia-dev
> 
-- 
~transami