On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 08:41:47PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote: > On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 20:22, Paul Davis wrote: > > >On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 07:18:57PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote: > > I see what you're saying, and don't get me wrong - I didn't mean to > imply it's an easy thing to do. But it is however, possible. Just > getting a standard mechanism for the host to call an executable > somewhere that shows the plugins GUI (with communication via OSC or > something like that) would work, and is doable. > > I'm just saying the "let's pick a toolkit!" debate isn't going to go > anywhere at all, and there's no point in starting it (yet.. again..). > > You're right, it *isn't* simple - which is a good reason IMHO to try and > make it as simple as possible and avoid all the nasty > toolkit/event-loop/etc problems. > > Or maybe "we" should just pick a damn toolkit and be done with it; what > the hell do I know? (absolutely zero sarcasm intended)
why dont we specify behaviour and a gfx format for control animations and then implement the widgets for gtk and qt ? you volounteered for qt. i can do the gtk part. anyone for fltk ? i dont see a problem. there is knob code for every toolkit on sourceforge. lets unify the gfx data have a widget for every toolkit. > > -DR- > > > -- torben Hohn http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
