On 11 Feb 2008, at 19:43, Gonzalo Garramuño wrote: > > A more interesting comment about fltk (one of the two negative > ones) is > this one:
Yes, I saw that too. > "Sadly true. fltk is on life support barely above abandonware levels. What that really means is that there isn't a feeding frenzy with folk fixing bugs and adding whiz-bang new features every day. Which is true, of course, since fltk-1.1. works and is basically bug- free. Like libjpeg or zlib. Things that Just Work. Things you can use. > Currently what kills fltk as a useable toolkit is it's inability to > gracefullly handle automatic relayout due to language/locale changes. I have nothing constructive to say here. I wonder what toolkit the author thought *did* handle that gracefully? > Not to mention that the api in many places feels like an > amateuristic hack. Which translates either as "It is different from the toolkit I know" or possibly just as "I failed to understand the subtly of what's been done." > It could be tempting to take the fltk code base and actually make > something out of it, though." As ever, actions speak louder than words. I think we can safely assume the author of the original comments will have a long and happy career posting to web-sites, but will never actually, quite, get round to contributing anything useful. Such has ever been the way. _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
