On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Giuliano Colla wrote:
> 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 VCL doesn't dictate anything, it's a wrapper around Win32 native
controls, so at least that widgetset should "work".
I doubt Borland went as far as to specify a set of consistent specs.
At least I never saw them. And the behaviour changed (subtly) over the
versions of Delphi/Windows as well.
You can discuss forever about this. The only thing that the Lazarus people
can try to do is make the widgetset behave as consistent as possible over
all widgetsets, without sacrificing the native look they get by using native
widgets.
Instead of putting a lot of time in such mostly useless debates (its not
the first, and probably not the last) it would have been better to report
possible bugs or - better yet - provide patches to improve the behaviour.
Michael.
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
