RE: [boost] Re: GUI/GDI template library

From: Brock Peabody (brock.peabody_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-30 12:28:39

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of E. Gladyshev
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 10:50 AM
> To: Boost mailing list
> Subject: Re: [boost] Re: GUI/GDI template library
> 
> >  >...[compile-time or run-time?] I don't know what
> > is the best way to go.
> >
> > It is always hard to know the best way to go if you
> > don't know where you
> > are going.
> >
> > A GUI/GDI library might fill one or more needs:
> ...
> > [Controlling the look-and-feel]
> 
> Setting aside the poster's philosophical comments.
> 
> What does look-and-feel have to do with the
> "compile-time or run-time" question?

Every design will have both run-time and compile-time aspects.  In my
opinion, you should defer until run-time only things that cannot be
determined at compile-time - why wait?  The simpler the system, the more
decisions we will be able to make at compile-time.

> 
> As for the look-and-feel, again the library simply
> doesn't have to care about how a control looks and
> feels.  If you want to control look-and-feel, you can
> always do it, if not, you can use one of the standards
> Win32, X, etc.

The problem is that a simple solution may not provide adequate support
for those who do care about (non-standard) look and feel.  It will
necessarily provide support for various standards, which should be
enough for an important number of applications.

Brock