View previous topic :: View next topic |
will you try leds for windows if available? |
no interest |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
eventually |
|
20% |
[ 1 ] |
I'm waiting for it |
|
80% |
[ 4 ] |
I will colaborate on it's development |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
Total Votes : 5 |
|
Author |
Message |
Ant
Joined: 06 Mar 2004 Posts: 306 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:38 pm Post subject: will you try leds for windows if available? |
|
|
I myself want to use leds on windows, but what about you?
Many asked before if leds would be available for windows. I tought I could make it but it's taking too long to do.
leds for windows is my next goal for my D projects.
Ant |
|
Back to top |
|
|
larsivi Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2004 Posts: 453 Location: Trondheim, Norway
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 3:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll probably try it if it you make it, but it's unlikely that I'll quit using Vim. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 1104
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd consider it if it's going to be really useful and simplifies building d projects. Specifically, if I still have to create a makefile for a project manually while using leds, then it's not much use to me; I could use any other text editor to accomplish the same thing. Integrating a souped up dmake would be a welcome addition (specifically one that automates library creation). I could think of quite a few more features I'd want too. Naturally, it would have to be win32 and linux compatible. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jcc7
Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 657 Location: Muskogee, OK, USA
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Does this mean you might try to get GTK+/Scintilla to work on Windows? Cool.
I'd try out LEDS if it had syntax highlight under Windows. I don't have anything against GTK+. In fact, I'm a proud user of Inkscape and the GIMP. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ant
Joined: 06 Mar 2004 Posts: 306 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jcc7 wrote: | Does this mean you might try to get GTK+/Scintilla to work on Windows? Cool. |
I'll try very hard. I'm just going to format the doc comments first - for my documentation generator and then I'll turn on my windows box.
jcc7 wrote: | I don't have anything against GTK+. |
You might know:
How differente is Gtk+ from MFC?
As I understantd they are at the same level, creating a layer over the windows API.
seems to me the MFC is more efficient and Gtk+ mode flexible.
Ant |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ant
Joined: 06 Mar 2004 Posts: 306 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JJR wrote: | I'd consider it if it's going to be really useful and simplifies building d projects. |
That's one of the objectives of leds - however, it's design for me. I'm open to suggestions.
JJR wrote: | Specifically, if I still have to create a makefile |
nah... leds does it for you. the latest version (svn) is better then the one distributed version.
JJR wrote: | I could use any other text editor to accomplish the same thing. Integrating a souped up dmake |
leds has it's version of something like that. It's probably not as good that's here suggestion are welcome to improve it. digc doesn't work on linux and has no support I'll have to check dmake.
JJR wrote: | would be a welcome addition (specifically one that automates library creation). |
it does it for static libs on linux and .lib on windows, I know nothing about dlls...
JJR wrote: | I could think of quite a few more features I'd want too. Naturally, it would have to be win32 and linux compatible. |
suggestions are welcome, I'll work on the windows version soon - but that's on my free hours which might be 2005...
Ant |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jcc7
Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 657 Location: Muskogee, OK, USA
|
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2004 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ant wrote: | You might know:
How differente is Gtk+ from MFC?
As I understantd they are at the same level, creating a layer over the windows API.
seems to me the MFC is more efficient and Gtk+ mode flexible. | I've never programmed with either, but as a user, the biggest difference is cosmetic. GTK+ program use widgets that look different than the standard Windows widgets. On the other hand, MFC programs use the standard Windows widgets. I suspect that GTK+ program use more memory, but I don't know for sure.
And GTK+ is open source and MFC is closed source, right? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JJR
Joined: 22 Feb 2004 Posts: 1104
|
Posted: Sun Dec 05, 2004 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
jcc7 wrote: | Ant wrote: | You might know:
How differente is Gtk+ from MFC?
As I understantd they are at the same level, creating a layer over the windows API.
seems to me the MFC is more efficient and Gtk+ mode flexible. |
I've never programmed with either, but as a user, the biggest difference is cosmetic. GTK+ program use widgets that look different than the standard Windows widgets. On the other hand, MFC programs use the standard Windows widgets. I suspect that GTK+ program use more memory, but I don't know for sure. |
Actually, GTK+ also has windows themed widgets at its disposal. I believe that theme is the default now, and it looks quite convincing. Have a look at the small samples at http://dui.sourceforge.net. Well, I guess the examples don't show the widgets, but the widgets are accurate renditions of the windows ones.
GTK+ programs do seem to link to quite the library load, but since those libraries are dynamic, the effect is no longer that noticeable. At present, you only realize how many libraries (8 to 10 I think) there are when you, as the programmer, have to link them to the program you're developing. Ant's tried to simplify the process on windows, but I still think it needs to be simplified more.... I mean made rediculously simple for us stupid folks. I don't even want to play with dialog boxes with tons of options.
jcc7 wrote: | And GTK+ is open source and MFC is closed source, right? |
I think MFC source is actually available. It's not opensource in the same sense as GTK+, though. MFC is pretty much outdated now anyway, and, from what I can determine from past experimentation, MFC is very attached to a visual development environment (Visual Studio). Try programming apart from it and it gets rediculous. I /hate/ C++ message maps. I think macro pre-processor programming is ugly and evil. Unfortunately wxWidgets, Fox toolkit, and other C++ GUI libraries make used of the message map idea thoroughly too (a shortcoming of C++), although they do provide alternative programming access.
Qt also uses the-preprocessor for C++, but it seems to do it with a little more finesse than the others (I don't know for sure). GTK+ is C-based: the nice thing about that is that practically any language can interface with it and make the interface look less ostere.
DUI is a good start to beautifying a cross-platform library like GTK+. I still think DUI needs quite a bit of work to make it attractive to programmers, though. As I think of ideas, I'll probably post them in the appropriate forum . Watch out, Ant .
Later,
John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|