> > > FLTK 3.0 with all > > features needed for a future GUI library. Compatibility layers for FLTK2 > > and FLTK1 would be designed in from the start, so that existing apps can > > be converted without much trouble. > > I think compatibility is most important! Look at fltk links-page and > think of all devolopers using fltk - there is a lot of code existing and >... > I don't know advantages and features of fltk2 (beside UTF-8 ;o), but is > there something really so important, making it necessary to throw away > all this labour done and make all those people fingering their code?
My personal feelling is fingering tends to get a little messey after a while as well as fresh and new programming approches change how we might approch a problem so re-assing this is always good. as far as c vs C++ ive seen good and bad programming in both methods. but most of the C++ designs we have taken I enjoy and as yet dont see a reason to change. I think what has tended to happen is 2.0 was a development platform never realy having a completion date where new ideas,designs,tests could be done and 1.0 becomming the released and stable version. Now over the years 2.0 has become more stable, some ideas been good and more effort to "clean it up" been givin to it. but it still has the "always testing" syndrome attached to it. I have been talking to bill about perhaps setting up a verions 3.0 for this and letting 2.0 become the next version moving the 1.8 to 2.0. curt _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
