Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Gene Buckle ge...@deltasoft.com wrote: I think that what I'm looking for is behavior similar to QT http://qt.nokia.com/ which I user quite often. I am sorry and apologize for using the word sucks. Pete, the problem is that QT doesn't live in the same graphics Space as FlightGear does. In order to make it work, all the commands that QT uses to draw interface elements would have to be ported to use OpenGL instead of the standard window manager. As was explained to me on IRC, this is already a solved problem: Qt widgets can be drawn into OpenGL buffers. That doesn't change the fact that it would be a great deal of work to port our GUI to Qt, and it would introduce a very large external dependency. Having seen the fit pitched when I started using boost... Now, big projects can get done, and motivated individuals with time on their hands can work wonders. We should keep in mind the relative importance of the GUI system to the whole flying experience and judge whether it would be worth the effort to do a huge rewrite in this area. Tim g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Tim Moore wrote: [...] That doesn't change the fact that it would be a great deal of work to port our GUI to Qt, and it would introduce a very large external dependency. Having seen the fit pitched when I started usineg boost... I think the biggest stumbling block with introducing boost had been forcing people to install a version of Boost which isn't available with their distributions. This has been in contrast to the tradition in FlightGear of being overly conservative about the versions of 3rd party libraries. Note that this statement is not to be counted as a vote for introducing Qt (even in a 'conservative' version number). From my perspective Qt is far too 'fat' as a tool to work on a task which is obviously of secondary importance in FlightGear. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010, Tim Moore wrote: As was explained to me on IRC, this is already a solved problem: Qt widgets can be drawn into OpenGL buffers. That doesn't change the fact that it would be a great deal of work to port our GUI to Qt, and it would introduce a very large external dependency. Having seen the fit pitched when I started using boost... Now, big projects can get done, and motivated individuals with time on their hands can work wonders. We should keep in mind the relative importance of the GUI system to the whole flying experience and judge whether it would be worth the effort to do a huge rewrite in this area. That's good to know Tim, I hadn't realized that. Assuming that _something_ should be done with the GUI as it stands now, what would be more effective, porting the whole thing to Qt or updating Pui to address any deficiencies that it has - at least with regard to FlightGear? g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Gene Buckle wrote: Assuming that _something_ should be done with the GUI as it stands now, what would be more effective, porting the whole thing to Qt or updating Pui to address any deficiencies that it has - at least with regard to FlightGear? Two or three years ago I've been wandering through the effort of ripping selected parts from the PLIB source tree and, errrm, 'merging' these into SimGear (not only PUI). It's been a terribly ugly hack (quick and dirty, I didn't even dare sharing it with the public) which also required tweaks to the FlightGear build system, it didn't see a single test on any other platform except Linux/AMD64, but nevertheless I found it suitable to demonstrate that this might be a pretty feasible way to get rid of the 'general' PLIB dependency. In my eyes this _could_ lead to maintaining the required UI bits inside SimGear and to improve them according to FlightGear's needs. On the other hand I'm pretty confident that other toolkits would be ready to do the same job as well. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010, Martin Spott wrote: Gene Buckle wrote: Assuming that _something_ should be done with the GUI as it stands now, what would be more effective, porting the whole thing to Qt or updating Pui to address any deficiencies that it has - at least with regard to FlightGear? Two or three years ago I've been wandering through the effort of ripping selected parts from the PLIB source tree and, errrm, 'merging' these into SimGear (not only PUI). It's been a terribly ugly hack (quick and dirty, I didn't even dare sharing it with the public) which also required tweaks to the FlightGear build system, it didn't see a single test on any other platform except Linux/AMD64, but nevertheless I found it suitable to demonstrate that this might be a pretty feasible way to get rid of the 'general' PLIB dependency. In my eyes this _could_ lead to maintaining the required UI bits inside SimGear and to improve them according to FlightGear's needs. On the other hand I'm pretty confident that other toolkits would be ready to do the same job as well. I guess what it boils down to what effort would have the most long term gain? I suspect it would be the wholesale jump to a new UI library... g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Pete Morgan wrote: GUI dialogs suck And now? Erik -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Erik Hofman wrote: Pete Morgan wrote: GUI dialogs suck And now? Erik very helpful erik. pete -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Hi Pete, The GUI is defined in XML and integrated with Nasal. There's a README.GUI file which describes most of it (IIRC there are some features that aren't documented at present). I'd suggest having a look there, as I don't think that most of your comments below are problems with the GUI code itself, but some specific dialogs which can be fixed. Comments inline. Pete Morgan wrote: * they do not maintain last position This will probably require some coding to fix. To be honest, that not something I would think is high on anyones priority list right now, but feel free to prove me wrong :) * Cant be resized I think some of them can, but I can't remember how. * label over flow spacing This will be a problems with a specific dialog I think. Which one have you seen this in? * no Validation on entry This is probably solvable with some Nasal. You can get values from the property tree reflecting the dialog inputs itself, and then have a simple timer checking on each one in turn while the dialog is active. I would think that with a bit of thought one could write a generic Nasal function that could easily be applied to many of the different dialogs. * Changes are sometimes immediate, even tapping in or deleting a figure, makes the entries applies to SIM REAL time key entry.. eg trying to change heading from 270 to 280, means removing the final O which makes aircraft head off to 27!!! You can define a specific input box as being live, which means any change to the input immediately affects the property value it is attached to. An alternative is to have an Apply button that applies all the input boxes to their properties. So, which dialog box is exhibiting this behaviour? Should be easy to fix. * they display a float of 111.999 where only the last .999 is visible Not sure about this one, which dialog are you seeing this in? * the dialogs do not utilise the apply button Yes they do! :) Is there a cool resolution. I use the Qt toolkit daily, and that widget set would accomodate all above easily, including rendering and validation. However Qt is a platform and heavy for the purposes of FG Is there an alternative and can we evaluate. We are to some extent hamstrung by the rather old GUI toolkit we use. However, replacing that is going to be non-trivial, and it would affect not just the core GUI but also all the dialog boxes that have been set up for particular aircraft. -Stuart -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Pete Morgan wrote: Erik Hofman wrote: Pete Morgan wrote: GUI dialogs suck And now? Erik very helpful erik. Like your comments indeed. If it really sucked then others would have complained already, and most likely it would have been fixed by now. Erik -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Stuart Buchanan wrote: We are to some extent hamstrung by the rather old GUI toolkit we use. However, replacing that is going to be non-trivial, and it would affect not just the core GUI but also all the dialog boxes that have been set up for particular aircraft. -Stuart That is probably the issue, but an issue that will need resolving looking forward. pete -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Friday 29 January 2010 10:27:24 Erik Hofman wrote: Like your comments indeed. If it really sucked then others would have complained already, and most likely it would have been fixed by now. Please don't take offense by his offensive choice of words and do not dismiss his valid points because of that: compared with what I'm used to on my KDE desktop the widgets in FlightGear really are very basic and I've experienced the same frustration as Pete did. If it were possible to switch to Qt for widgets that would be a massive improvement in my eyes. We would go from most basics work to top of the line. The question is: is it even possible to use Qt widgets in a GL application? The next one most probably: would there be any drawbacks? Stefan -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Here's the thing. FlightGear uses a gui widget set that is implemented on top of OpenGL. This has many advantages from a portability standpoint and from the standpoint of integrating with window systems. Pui doesn't have every feature under the sun, but it was never meant to. It's relatively small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much* easier for us. This is an area where simply writing an email with why the whole thing sucks is completely worthless. If you know something about gui systems, something about portability of code across all our supported platforms, and something about flightgear. Then post a proposal for a change. Better yet, post patches with a new gui system that doesn't suck, runs efficiently, supports all platforms, integrates cleanly with FlightGear, doesn't add a nightmare of new library dependencies, isn't chock full of bugs, does everything the current system does, and does everything you think a gui system should do, etc. etc. Regards, Curt. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Stefan Seifert wrote: On Friday 29 January 2010 10:27:24 Erik Hofman wrote: Like your comments indeed. If it really sucked then others would have complained already, and most likely it would have been fixed by now. Please don't take offense by his offensive choice of words and do not dismiss his valid points because of that: compared with what I'm used to on my KDE desktop the widgets in FlightGear really are very basic and I've experienced the same frustration as Pete did. If it were possible to switch to Qt for widgets that would be a massive improvement in my eyes. We would go from most basics work to top of the line. The question is: is it even possible to use Qt widgets in a GL application? The next one most probably: would there be any drawbacks? Stefan -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Curtis Olson wrote: Here's the thing. FlightGear uses a gui widget set that is implemented on top of OpenGL. This has many advantages from a portability standpoint and from the standpoint of integrating with window systems. Pui doesn't have every feature under the sun, but it was never meant to. It's relatively small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much* easier for us. Would it be possible (or even reasonable?) to strip out the GUI portion of plib (essentially divorcing it from the bits that are un-needed/wanted)? The idea being that if plib was stripped down to only the essential elements needed to support the GUI functionality, it might be more managable to improve incrementally as time goes on. The library could be renamed GUIGear and be maintained along with the other *Gear projects. It would also have the advantage of dropping an external library dependancy. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 06:54 -0800, Gene Buckle wrote: On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Curtis Olson wrote: Here's the thing. FlightGear uses a gui widget set that is implemented on top of OpenGL. This has many advantages from a portability standpoint and from the standpoint of integrating with window systems. Pui doesn't have every feature under the sun, but it was never meant to. It's relatively small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much* easier for us. Would it be possible (or even reasonable?) to strip out the GUI portion of plib (essentially divorcing it from the bits that are un-needed/wanted)? The idea being that if plib was stripped down to only the essential elements needed to support the GUI functionality, it might be more managable to improve incrementally as time goes on. The library could be renamed GUIGear and be maintained along with the other *Gear projects. It would also have the advantage of dropping an external library dependancy. g. I wonder if it would be better to adopt OSG's gui rather than forking plib? As I understand the current state of affairs, PUI is lightyears ahead of OSG's gui system though. Ron -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
First let me echo Erik. An offensive, adversarial approach isn't the best way when you are asking someone else to do something for you for free. On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 07:55 +, Pete Morgan wrote: * they do not maintain last position This needs to be handled very carefully, right now its possible to lose open dialogs when the main window shrinks because they are no longer on screen. Closing the dialog via esc and reopening it will currently bring it back. That trick would stop working if the remember last position function it too naive. * Cant be resized ??? Yes, they can. At least some can. Property browser, for instance. * label over flow spacing * no Validation on entry * Changes are sometimes immediate, even tapping in or deleting a figure, makes the entries applies to SIM REAL time key entry.. eg trying to change heading from 270 to 280, means removing the final O which makes aircraft head off to 27!!! Assuming you mean the Generic Autopilot dialog, I'm not seeing that behavior here? * they display a float of 111.999 where only the last .999 is visible This is an artifact of the floating point number system. It might be possible to change the display to a string and use some underlying nasal glue to copy values back and forth... Ron -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Ron Jensen wrote: small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much* easier for us. Would it be possible (or even reasonable?) to strip out the GUI portion of plib (essentially divorcing it from the bits that are un-needed/wanted)? The idea being that if plib was stripped down to only the essential elements needed to support the GUI functionality, it might be more managable to improve incrementally as time goes on. The library could be renamed GUIGear and be maintained along with the other *Gear projects. It would also have the advantage of dropping an external library dependancy. g. I wonder if it would be better to adopt OSG's gui rather than forking plib? As I understand the current state of affairs, PUI is lightyears ahead of OSG's gui system though. It's my understanding that replacing plib as the GUI would be a LOT of work. That's why I suggested cutting it down to only what is relevant for the GUI. That would make it a more managable solution. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
pui already is a separate distinct library within plib. It depends on some central utility stuff, but that's about it as far as I know. So it is pretty stripped down and separate already. Curt. On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Gene Buckle wrote: On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Ron Jensen wrote: small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much* easier for us. Would it be possible (or even reasonable?) to strip out the GUI portion of plib (essentially divorcing it from the bits that are un-needed/wanted)? The idea being that if plib was stripped down to only the essential elements needed to support the GUI functionality, it might be more managable to improve incrementally as time goes on. The library could be renamed GUIGear and be maintained along with the other *Gear projects. It would also have the advantage of dropping an external library dependancy. g. I wonder if it would be better to adopt OSG's gui rather than forking plib? As I understand the current state of affairs, PUI is lightyears ahead of OSG's gui system though. It's my understanding that replacing plib as the GUI would be a LOT of work. That's why I suggested cutting it down to only what is relevant for the GUI. That would make it a more managable solution. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Curtis Olson wrote: pui already is a separate distinct library within plib. It depends on some central utility stuff, but that's about it as far as I know. So it is pretty stripped down and separate already. Curt. Given that, would it make sense to use it as the basis for a GUIGear? Pull the utility code with pui and go? g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Gene Buckle wrote: Given that, would it make sense to use it as the basis for a GUIGear? Pull the utility code with pui and go? Possibly the fact that we also use the joystick and IO interface libraries from plib. JoyGUIIOGear? :) Cheers, Anders -- --- Anders Gidenstam WWW: http://www.gidenstam.org/FlightGear/ -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
Curtis Olson wrote: Here's the thing. FlightGear uses a gui widget set that is implemented on top of OpenGL. This has many advantages from a portability standpoint and from the standpoint of integrating with window systems. Pui doesn't have every feature under the sun, but it was never meant to. It's relatively small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much* easier for us. This is an area where simply writing an email with why the whole thing sucks is completely worthless. If you know something about gui systems, something about portability of code across all our supported platforms, and something about flightgear. Then post a proposal for a change. Better yet, post patches with a new gui system that doesn't suck, runs efficiently, supports all platforms, integrates cleanly with FlightGear, doesn't add a nightmare of new library dependencies, isn't chock full of bugs, does everything the current system does, and does everything you think a gui system should do, etc. etc. I think that what I'm looking for is behavior similar to QT http://qt.nokia.com/ which I user quite often. I am sorry and apologize for using the word sucks. pete -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GUI dialogs suck
I think that what I'm looking for is behavior similar to QT http://qt.nokia.com/ which I user quite often. I am sorry and apologize for using the word sucks. Pete, the problem is that QT doesn't live in the same graphics Space as FlightGear does. In order to make it work, all the commands that QT uses to draw interface elements would have to be ported to use OpenGL instead of the standard window manager. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
