Advantage 3 is what really seems attractive to me. To change versions in my classes I need the big packages: wd, plot, grid, OpenGL. Maybe wd will be solved. From message traffic here it appears that plot works in 701. It also appears that grid does not. I find the lack of talk about OpenGL ominous. Will it be possible to run OpenGL in our new J7 world, someday?
Henry Rich On 2/6/2011 4:08 AM, bill lam wrote: > wd and gtk are very different, using wd-emulator for migration to gtk is > not only un-necessary and it needs an extra migration from wd-emulator > to gtk. > > wd-emulator does have advantages, > 1. it is simple and familiar. > 2. it is fast, and will not be slower than gtk or wd. > 3. it is an open source implementation of wd, so users can modify or add > new features. eg, add more widget events that should long have be > done in the last decade(s). If there is enough user contribution, a > third ide for J7 based on this wd-emulator is not impossible. > > I guess one would agree that it need not throwing away J602 and migrating > its applications, unless clients ask and pay the bill. On the other hand > develop new projects in J7, if there are any new projects ;-) > > Вск, 06 Фев 2011, Ian Clark писал(а): >> I don't see the problem as one of providing a wd-like interface built on gtk. >> Merely to enable old code to run somehow, anyhow. In a way that >> facilitates migration to native gtk. >> So where's the need to redesign wd? >> >> There must be masses of j scripts out there and the sheer person-hours >> to migrate each one by hand to a new gtk gui -- however powerful and >> flexible -- is not negligible. Not even for my collection. But until >> that is done the script is useless. >> >> There is always the option to retain a (frozen) j602 installation to >> run old utilities, but there is a downside to doing that. I'd much >> rather move whole and entire to j701 without delay -- and discard my >> j602. Even a macroprocessor to convert J scripts would be a boon, even >> if it copped-out at difficult bits and left me to migrate them by >> hand. 2 or 3 lines in my whole user library, I don't doubt. >> >> I'm not sure I wouldn't prefer a macroprocessor to a wd emulator. The >> former can be used once per user for each script and soon discarded. >> The latter will be a constant source of annoyance to both users and >> vendor, generating endless requests for support. Just at the time >> everyone wants to be exploring the new technology. >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:26 AM, chris burke<[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Ian Clark<[email protected]> wrote: >>> ... >>>> This is due to change shortly. Just so soon as I can >>>> take a good look at Bill's start at a wd-emulator. >>> >>> As mentioned before, wd needs a major redesign for gtk. Trying to >>> shoehorn the gtk interface into the old design is not likely to work >>> well. The main issue is the layout - gtk has a variety of tools for >>> handling form layout automatically, while wd layout is hard coded. It >>> would be a mistake to throw out gtk automatic layout in favour of wd >>> hard coding. >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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
