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

From: brock (brock.peabody_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-03 19:31:46

Personally I would much rather start from scratch.  I want something that is
boost from the ground up, not a project that has a code so old it supports
MSVC 4.0.  Who knows if the folks at wxWindows or elsewhere have the same
goals as boost.  Don't they have an open source license?  Developing a GUI
library from the ground up will be hard, but worthwhile.  Developing a GUI
applications is also hard.  Having a library with an interface that
leverages the advantages of modern C++ saves me a lot more time than what I
spent making the library.  From what I've seen of the interface to
wxWindows, I don't think I'd be gaining much over MFC.

Anyway, I do have a library whose interface (if not yet implementation) is
platform independent.  I haven't gotten any feedback about whether anyone
likes the library itself, or the syntax I've been proposing, something like:

   gui_manager<employee> app = row( "name", edit(&employee::ssn));

   app.set_data(get_employee());

It is in the files section with the name boost_gui.zip.  If someone would at
least tell me that my ideas stink I would feel better :)  As soon as I get
everything upgraded to VC 7 I'm going to rewrite it with the idea of
submitting it to boost for a review.  I've never written a GUI for another
platform but if no one wants to colaborate I'll do that too.  Any
suggestions?  Developing this will be work, but it is not rocket science.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Philippe A. Bouchard" <philippe_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 7:02 PM
Subject: [boost] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GUI/GDI template library

> Rene Rivera wrote:
> > [2003-08-03] Philippe A. Bouchard wrote:
> >
> >> WxWindows don't have any intermediate compiler but the end user
> >> syntax is not attractive for the signal / slot mechanism (macros).
> >
> > Yes, and no. You can use the macros if you like that sort of stuff.
> > But the signal/slot mecahnism is just as easilly available directly
> > with the "Connect" interface. Thruth is WX doesn't need most, if not
> > all, of the macros it uses. If only you could convice the WX
> > developers of that ;-)
>
> ... other issues:
>
> - Qt is more popular than WxWindows because it is commercial:
>     - they can support their product;
>     - they can affort to sponsor their product;
>     - people won't have to install yet another library;
>     - it is binary compatible with previous versions also.
>
> But I think WxWindows developpers can affort to completely rewrite their
> engine if a better syntax is available.  Yours to decide.
>
>
>
> Philippe
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>