On 6/4/2010 18:54, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
waldo kitty wrote:
unless i misunderstand something, once the LCL_fpGUI interface stuff
is done, fpGUI will be a "drop-in" replacement for any of the existing
interfaces... GTK1, GTK2, QT, WIN-whatever, etc...
do i misunderstand that?
I'd hope that you don't. But right now it seems to me that Graeme is
kvetching about the fact that Lazarus's GTK1 support is going downhill
without making it clear whether he really wants to use it or whether
he's advertising fpGUI as an alternative.
the way i'm reading his posts is that he wants to see GTK1 working if it is
going to be included in the feature/widget set lists... if it isn't, then remove
it... make sense, really...
that he mentions fpGUI as an alternative is simply, to me, providing an
alternative for those that need something that works and is light weight to
replace GTK1 with if it is going to sit and be dead meat...
The Linux distreax have in general moved to GTK2 and deprecate GTK1, at
which point I think it's reasonable for Lazarus to prefer GTK2 (plus
Carbon, Qt and so on). At the same time there seems to be a consensus
that something slimmer is desirable, but- speaking as an outsider- I
think it would be an enormous waste of effort trying to work on both
fpGUI and GTK1 simultaneously.
true to a point... that point being the existing codebase running on small
dedicated devices that currently use GTK1... those cannot switch to GTK2 or
other widget sets because of memory and space constraints... at least that's my
understanding of the conversations...
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
