On 17 Aug 2000, Morten Eriksen wrote:
Morten,
> I tend to disagree. For any non-trivial, "real-world" application the
> complete volume of GUI-related code you write will be so much larger
> than the size of your So{Xt,...}-related code that there is very
> little to gain from making a complete "So-abstraction".
Well that may be true but for writing quick and dirty applications it
certainly would be nice to have a window system independant interface.
glut (and I'm definitely not advocating it's use here) has demonstrated to
what extent it's nice to have a layer of abstraction on top of the
windowing stuff.
>
> I believe the better strategy is to use a GUI toolkit which is
> "multi-platform enough" for your particular purpose for the complete
> application, and then use a specific So-binding against that.
>
> There is already an SoQt binding for Inventor, and we have an SoGtk in
> the works. Qt and gtk+ seems to me to be the only sensible options for
> a multi-platform GUI toolkit at the moment.
IMHO Qt is not a good solution because:
1) it's not free for use under Windows
2) it's subject to a much more restrictive license than what we used for
Open Inventor (free for "open source/non-proprietary software", far from
ideal)
A+,
Alexandre.
--
Alexandre Naaman - naaman@xxxxxxx - La conformité est la mort de l'âme.
|