I was using an isigraph window to display a 3D
gl2 plot on my MacBook Pro. When I tried to run
the program on a 64-bit Ubuntu Linux box there
was a problem initializing the graphics display.
As I recall, the problem was lack of support on
64-bit systems, but it's been a while so I don't
recall all the details.
The nice thing about J6 was that it was very easy
to lay out a GUI using by dragging items onto the
form editor. I could then edit the automatically
generated code to line things up more precisely.
I certainly hope that wd will be maintained. There
should be upward compatibility from one J version
to the next so people don't have to keep drastically
revising their code.
--- Brian
On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 09:24:47 +0800
bill lam <[email protected]> wrote:
>wd in J8 is open source so that it won't die if users
continue
>to maintain it.
>
>J602 wd supports both 32 and 64 bit where J runs.
Which
>platform or specific features did you have trouble
with?
>
>Пт, 15 мар 2013, McGuinness, Brian писал(а):
>>The wd interface should be a permanent part of J from
>>now on. The J6 wd and the associated GUI design tool
>>made it very easy to create GUI-based J applications
>>that were reasonably portable between platforms. The
>>only major flaw was a lack of support for 64-bit
>>platforms.
>>
>>When J7 came out with completely different interfaces,
>>I felt as if the rug had been pulled out from under
me.
>>Why use J at all if one can't count on a stable
>>platform to work with? Java would then be a better
>>choice. Also, while I experimented a bit with JHS,
>>I never did anything with JGTK due to the lack of
>>user documentation. A few sample programs do not
>>constitute adequate documentation, nor does a
>>pointer to documentation for the C/C++ GTK API.
>>
>>If J8 continues to support wd and the GUI design tool,
>>and these work on 64-bit platforms, then I will
>>seriously consider writing GUI-based applications
>>in J once again. But I'm not interested in playing
>>a constant game of catch-up with an ever-changing
>>platform, and I'm sure most other people feel the
>>same way.
>>
>>--- Brian
>>
>>On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:26:01 +1300
>> Ric Sherlock <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>The wd implementation vastly simplifies the GUI
landscape for
>>J6/J7
>>>users.
>>>It is much easier to port existing apps to J8 and IMO
provides a
>>>simpler
>>>and more powerful GUI design experience compared the
old J6 wd,
>>>while at
>>>the same time being vastly more consistent across
platforms.
>>>
>>>As I see it there are a couple of additional benefits
of the
>>have
>>>in the J
>>>IDE written using wd:
>>> a) once the wd Qt interface becomes stable there
should be much
>>>less
>>>reason to need to provide new binaries. Further
>>>development/maintenance of
>>>the ide/qt addon could then take place without any
requirement
>>to
>>>install
>>>new binaries each time, simply upgrading the addon
using Package
>>>Manager
>>>would do the job.
>>>
>>> b) It provides a proof-of-concept of the wd GUI
framework for a
>>>more
>>>complex application, as well as a great source of
examples of
>>how
>>>to use it
>>>to create an application.
>>>
>>>Assuming performance would be acceptable, maybe it's
something
>>that
>>>could
>>>be looked at for J8.1 or J9?
>>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:12 PM, chris burke
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> how feasible it would be to write the ide using
the wd
>>>>interface?
>>>>
>>>>It could be done, though we would need to extend wd
a little.
>>>>
>>>>However, I don't think there would be much benefit.
With
>>earlier
>>>>J
>>>>versions, we felt that having the IDE in J meant
both that the
>>>>code would
>>>>be much simpler, and also easier for the end user to
customize.
>>>>The first
>>>>no longer holds with Qt, i.e. the amount of source
for the Qt
>>IDE
>>>>is about
>>>>the same as the source for the old J wd IDE (and
both very much
>>>>smaller
>>>>than for GTK). Also, we never really had end users
customizing
>>>>the IDE.
>>>>
>>>>One thing I do notice with Qt is that the system is
noticeably
>>>>snappier
>>>>than in J6 wd and J7 GTK.
>>>>
>>>>Incidentally, we didn't design it this way.
Originally, the Qt
>>>>IDE had no
>>>>wd, and it was only because we wanted some simple
windows, e.g.
>>>>for
>>>>viewmat, that we looked at it at all. Bill and I
worked on this
>>>>for a few
>>>>days over Xmas, and to my surprise, found that
implementing wd
>>>>would be
>>>>relatively straightforward.
>>>>
>>>>On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Ric Sherlock
>><[email protected]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The wd interface for Qt seems to be rounding out
really well.
>>>>It looks as
>>>>> though it is pretty fast and powerful as well as
being quite
>>>>easy to use
>>>>> for J6 wd users.
>>>>> Currently the main part of the J Qtide is written
directly in
>>>>C++. I'd be
>>>>> interested to hear how feasible it would be to
write the ide
>>>>using the wd
>>>>> interface?
>>>>> What would be the downsides?
>>>>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> For information about J forums see
>>>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>>
>>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>For information about J forums see
>>>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>For information about J forums see
>>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>For information about J forums see
>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
>--
>regards,
>====================================================
>GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
>gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>For information about J forums see
>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see
http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
