Florian Klaempfl ha scritto:
Lord Satan schrieb:
[...]
That's correct. And if they had used OpenGL for it, it would be
hardware accelerated, cross plattform and good looking, too. And we
would need no stupid Aero or Compiz or other composition managers.
And we could do things other widgetsets could only dream of. And
porting to OpenES would be easy, too. Stupid Lazarus developers.
That's simply not the aim of the lazarus developers. They are interested
in native gui support and high vcl compatibility, no more, no less.
That's the real catch. They're not stupid, but they're faced with an
impossible task: to implement conflicting specs.
vcl implies a number of precise, consistent specs, which dictate
component behavior. They're the real value of Delphi.
Native widgetsets implies a number of specs (often vague and loosely
defined) which are different from vcl, and don't map into them.
The result is that vcl compatibility is reduced to the minimal subset of
coincident specs between native widgetset and vcl. Which is very often
unsatisfactory. For my range of applications this makes LCL completely
useless. I find one feature supported by gtk1, one supported by gtk2,
another one by Qt, but nowhere all the required features supported.
Either one takes the Qt way, i.e. using style to *mimic* the native
*look*, without actually using it, and provides a consistent behavior,
regardless of the widget appearance, or a cross-platform application is
unable to provide consistent behavior without loads of IFDEF's, which
defeat the very cross-platform idea.
The current trend of moving implementation from LCL to widgetset goes
exactly in the opposite direction: it becomes more *native*, and loses
vcl specs.
There's also something to say about *native* widgetsets: show me someone
really requesting a GTK1 native look, and which doesn't believe at the
same time to be Napoleon, and I'll change my opinion. -:)
The
initial coding for fpGUI was done at the same time as lazarus starts
(1999). However, nobody was interested in contributing to it so it went
into hibernation.
Without a mature IDE to work with, fpGUI isn't worth the trouble. It
becomes much easier to learn C++ and use Qt Designer, or whatever.
But a mature IDE is the real achievement of Lazarus team. Not being
hampered by *native* considerations, or other impossible constraints,
they've achieved an impressive work. It's Lazarus IDE which makes fpGUI
worth considering today, and which could make worth seriously
considering fgGUI way, i.e. an alternative to the buggy and inconsistent
*native* widgetsets, for all the range of applications which require it.
Just my two cents.
Giuliano
--
Giuliano Colla
Whenever people agree with me, I always feel I must be wrong (O. Wilde)
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
