RE: [boost] GUI/GDI template library

From: Brock Peabody (brock.peabody_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-06 13:50:25

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of E. Gladyshev
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:33 AM
> To: Boost mailing list
> Subject: RE: [boost] GUI/GDI template library
> 

[...]

> To the method 1 pros list:
> - More user friendly. If the user implements the layer
> 1, she can use the library with her custom GUI
> platform.

OK, so there is a separate implementation of the first layer for each
target GUI?  That would be better.

[...]
 
> Sorry why does adding new target affect code referring
> to existing targets? Could you give an example?

For an exaggerated example, imagine that we design and implement layer
one knowing nothing about any GUI APIs besides Win32.  We'll probably
have to make a lot of revisions if we then want to make that scheme fit
over a *nix GUI API. 

[...]

> to the the Method 2 cons list:
> 
> - The user won't be able to use the library on top of
> a custom GUI (like some requested) unless she writes
> it from scratch.

Yeah, that's probably the biggest con, I just forgot it.

It sounds like you are advocating a scheme somewhere between the two
extremes I described:

layer 1 - an abstraction of common GUI elements that is at a lower level
than the 'domain specific sublanguage' of the primary public interface,
but is implemented separately for each target GUI API.

layer 2 - The top level public interface is implemented in terms of the
layer 1, platform independent API.  There is only one implementation of
the top level public interface.

Does this sound better?