Re: [rgui-dev] Clairvoyance

[Tom Sawyer]

On Wed, 2002-08-28 at 18:08, Leon Torres wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Massimiliano Mirra wrote:
> 
> I guess I've hinted what my vision was, it's worth repeating. The future
> is a gui tk written in pure-Ruby. Ruby-Wise is probably the forefather of
> this approach. We should be leveraging the power of Ruby to build us a
> nice, new API which is an adherent of the Ruby way from day 1. To get
> there, lots of work needs to be done. However, we can be there _today_
> with gutopia. Gutopia will provide the first implementation of that
> magical API, but its guts are not pure Ruby. Instead, it relies on already
> established gui tks, usually written in C/C++, to do the driving. In time,
> as this new Ruby-only tk matures, gutopia should be slowly retired in its
> favor. It is *very* important that gutopia does not lock itself into any
> particular alien gui tk model, especially those written in C/C++. In the
> end, the pure-Ruby approach should be an innovative thing, not a copycat.

hmm.. i think this is sort of right but i don't think GUtopIa will be
flying out the window for RubyTk. i think the pure ruby gui will have a
very important place among lower-level coders and embedded coders, but
you will not see it upseting the status quo in a number of places,
business apps for instance, there the native look and feel will remain
dominant. furhter when in comes to game/multimedia type apps, it is much
more likly that an OpenGL based GUI will be desired and that is what we
have with ParaGUI. so i think all of these will reamin relevant, and in
fact i have selected them based on these criteria.

Ruby-wise is "RubyTk". and i have talked to Kero about making it tightly
integrated with the GUtopIa API, such the Ruby-Wise's API *IS* GutopIa's
API and vice-versa. so your code below would indeed follow, so to speak,
but like i said the GUtopIa part won't be going anywhere. essentially
then:

  require 'gutopia'  # meta-api
  require 'wise'     # target platform

even though, in this case, the binding may very well be 100% one-to-one
betweeen the two.

~transami