On 2018-10-16 at 07:50, bill-auger wrote: > the proliferation of dialects has been the bane of smalltalk since the > early days - there have been efforts over the years to unify them > in order to make the codes more portable but the efforts were mostly > disjointed and none were universally adopted - it was even standardized > by ANSI at one point and still to this day few smalltalk dialects > follow the standard
Okay, and I guess Cincom’s one is a non-standard dialect as well… So isn’t “Dialog” used in some nearly compatible way by any system this way? or can’t it be because that would then either enforce a toolkit library over another or prompt users for which one they want to use? > on the other hand it is very simple in smalltalk to write wrappers > around just about anything - GNU smalltalk has bindings to GUI toolkits > such as GTK, but it can also interface with any native library; so it > would be uncomplicated to write bindings to any other toolkit such as QT > or whatever Interesting …and I guess rewriting interfaces so that to make stuff compatible mustn’t be that hard neither? > if the task at hand is plainly "present a GUI dialog window to the > user", then yes GNU smalltalk can already do that OOTB - surely it is > not the exact name of the class that is important? I tried to use GTK.GtkDialog but were unable to find how to do. I didn’t find anything related in the manual, and the fact I still don’t know GTK+ nor Smalltalk must harden the task ^^' What’s the canonical way of doing this? so I can check if it works here (I heard there were issues in some distributions…)… and maybe from that experiment so that to do more stuff. _______________________________________________ help-smalltalk mailing list help-smalltalk@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
