>From: "Rob & Lori" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > E. Gladyshev wrote: > > >--- Edward Diener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>As you have pointed out in the rest of your post, it > >>may prove more > >>worthwhile to work with the developers which already > >>exist for a free > >>cross-platform framework like wxWindows, in order to > >>encourage them to use > >>more modern C++ idioms > > > >I agree with this suggestion. I am wondering how > >realistic would it be?
As I quoted from their roadmap, there are plans to do this - at least changing the components used to standard components, such as changing wxString to std::sstring. After all, the library originated long before there was a standard, and a standard string. > Personally I'm not certain I like that idea. WxWindows is much more > than just multi-platform GUI. This means when you only need the GUI > you'll be linking to everything else in their library, which increases > your code size. I'm aware of that. However, with boostification/transforming it to use modern C++ idioms, one might also change it to use existing standard components for these, or Boost components. One might also omit parts not strictly belonging to a GUI library, such as database access. Or one could include it, if no Boost library supports that at the time. Make no mistake - this is a lot of work, too. However, it may be much less work than creating one from scratch. What do we want - vaporware of a Boost GUI library coming "real soon now", perhaps not appearing for many years, if ever, due to the amount of work, or adapting an existing solution and being able to use it here and now, with a boostified version to come? Anyway, it was just a thought. wxWindows is already tested and debugged - and has been used in real-world projects. It's shown its worth. By the way, dynamic layout have been mentioned (like layout managers in Java), and wxWindows support these, as well. As Alec Ross pointed out, there's also an XML-based portable resource format (XRC) (http://www.wxwindows.org/manuals/2.4.0/wx478.htm), and a resource editor for it. > Besides, I believe it would take more effort to change all the existing > WxWindows code to use modern C++ techniques (which they would probably > be against for backwards compatibility reasons) than it would to create > one from scratch. This might also be. It is something to consider. My goal was to include existing libraries in the discussion, and that has been met. Regards, Terje _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
