Grrr... always send from the wrong account. > > This is why I think reimplementing wxWindows would be better. It would > also not add additional requirements. It would compile against > something the user should have (GTK+, Xlib, Motif, Aqua, Carbon, etc.) > Of course, this runs into the problem of having to maintain the code > changes wxWindows has. > > I'm just waiting for someone to say adding LGPL classes would be okay in > the BSD tree. > > What do other people think about this approach? I'd like to have a > cross-platform GUI, but I want to know what people think first. > Especially if I'll have to go through all this stuff w/ making a C# dll > that platform invokes an externally C dll and internally C++ dll that > calls C++ dll (can anyone else say icky) > > On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 22:05, murban wrote: > > Have you looked at some of the other bindings that call C++ from C#? One > > example is Qt#. It's a work in progress, but the basic concepts of using a > > C++ based toolkit from C# are working. There are many other examples, such as > > WxPython and QtJava. > > > > The bindings that I have looked at use a two-level approach. The first level > > is a set of C functions. There are one or more C functions that perform 'new > > WhateverObject' and then return the result, and there are other C functions > > that simply call the C++ function. Thiis lower level is compiled #extern "C" > > so that name mangling is not performed. The second level consists of a set of > > C# methods that call the C functions. In the case of Qt#, the C functions are > > provided by another library QtC. > > > > I believe it is possible to minimize (probably not eliminate) the C layer, but > > the C functions that perform the 'new' for C++ objects are difficult to > > eliminate. The other two complications of calling C++ directly are that the > > compiler does name-mangling on the C++ methods, and the fact that virtual > > methods only appear as methods on the base class. > > > > > I have been looking at wxWindows for quite some time. I don't > > > think I personally want to deal with importing C++ classes and looking > > > at them as structs. This seems very, very painful. Unless someone can > > > explain an easier way to platform invoke these, I don't think this will > > > work. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > > >
_______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
