On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Matthew" == Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Matthew> Hi,
>
> Matthew> I was just investigating fltk and it seems that it comes with
> Matthew> a compatibility header file which allows forms and Xforms
> Matthew> code to be compiled using fltk.
>
> Matthew> This sounds like a rather handy feature, especially given
> Matthew> that it would allow LyX to dump the non-free Xforms stuff
> Matthew> before the gui independance rewrite is done.
>
> Matthew> I'll try this when I get home tonight, but has anyone else
> Matthew> investigated this?
>
> I think Allan mentionned that he tried that earlier. I do not remember
> what the result was, however. Please go on and try that. I'd be very
> interested to see it work.
Gosh, I just answered this in a different thread -- too much email in the
in tray. Way to go Asger you've sparked up the development list in the
last few days since the 1.0 announcement.
Anyway back to the story at hand.
I did do some testing and had started trying to add a few things to fltk's
forms.h to get all of lyx compiled. That was in early May and I haven't
looked at it in ages because it wasn't a high priority however I do think
we should be able to get support for both xforms and fltk from the same
code. Whether thats desirable or not is another matter.
fltk's "native" style is somewhat different to xforms. Though it will at
least use the .fd files.
Allan.
P.S. the advantage of keeping xforms support or xforms style at least is
that all the code is already written and we can continue cutting and
pasting and moving files to get gui independence.
So do we really want to drop xforms completely?
I'm happy enough to, if others are -- just so long as we get something we
can use to support a windows version (and preferably an OS/2 non-X version
also)
