On 4/2/07, Marc Weustink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
THere was no study, however during the years, the inner workings of the
LCL <-> Widgetset changed (and is still changing).
I can imagine the inner workings changing - it is a mamoth task to
bind all those native widget sets.
As Florian already said, we choose for a native widgetset. That was at
that time one of the key points why I joined toe project.
I would have thought for a project the size of Lazarus, there would
have been some prototypes and documentation to evaluate the pros and
cons of either going native or writing from scratch. And there being a
definitive reason why picking the one over the other - rather than,
it's just what everybody wanted. Maybe it's just me being used to the
commercial environment where planning and fact finding documentation
is a requirement before development starts. :-)
> behaviour of widget sets differ between platforms. [It's been one of
> THOSE days!]
Document those differences !
If they are unknown they won't get solved.
After posting so many questions and bug reports in one day, I start
feeling like a nagging nanny. :-) Either way, I will start reporting
the difference instead of just trying to work around them.
Yes, and thats for me one of the reasons why I try to avoid Qt apps
under windows if I have a choice. They feel different/primitive
Seeing that you are a windows person.... Open Windows Media Player.
Any version from v8 onwards. How native does that look or feel
compared to the rest of the OS. So why may Microsoft get away with it
and others not? fpGUI in its invinite state looks a lot more native
that Windows Media Player (I've got WMP 8 infront of me).
--
Graeme Geldenhuys
There's no place like S34° 03.168' E018° 49.342'
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
