Re: GTK+ v FLTK

[Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>]

Hi Mark,

On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 18:33, M. Evans wrote:
> > In a word - no. Gtk+ provides a graphics device abstraction just like
> > any other toolkit; that runs fine, even well on Win32.
> 
> That wasn't brought into question. My question was how closely the
> GTK+ abstraction layer, on any platform, resembles X11 API.

	Well; the best people to answer that are the gtk+ hackers; although
quite why that should be an issue I don't really see.

> Cross-posting was impolite. Maybe we should bring the FLTK folks in
> here too! They would say that GTK+ is Wrong (tm). Then we could have a
> real Flame War! You get the idea.

	I would imagine that we would all benefit from a more informed
discussion; I imagine you under-estimate the FLTK team.

> Personally I don't think either toolkit is the way to go, and have
> already said so. These debates can go on forever until someone lays
> out a public requirements matrix specific to OpenOffice.

	Quite; however the few requirements articulated: accessibility, R->L,
advanced language rendering, compatible licensing etc. eliminate all but
a tiny handful of toolkits. I couldn't agree more that carefully
articulating the complete requirement set is a most useful exercise.

	Regards,

		Michael.

-- 
 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot