Micah Dowty wrote:
I think the biggest problem was just motivation in general. It's hard toI think this interpretation is only right for the unixish targets, and therefore misses my point. In the unixish world you _have_ alternatives, so it was only consequent that folks didn't get excited enough to reach the "critical mass" of developers. In the "deeply embedded" world, developers would have been very happy about PicoGUI feature-wise, size-wise and concept-wise. I think it was mainly the portability issue which held them back. The portability issue can hardly be solved by application developers. If it's not in the main focus of the core developers, a specific port would become an unmaintainable oneway street and nobody wants that.
get excited about a GUI that doesn't already do everything you want it to...
I would have written PicoGUI applications if there was sufficient portability in the first place, no matter wether I lack some features for a while. To be more exact, I even started to port PicoGUI, but quickly ended up in a jungle of small problems, which I personally could only have solved "dirty" losing maintainability. So I gave up.
In the embedded world, applications are often very product specific, pre-existing applications do not play such an important role. I feel that the existing examples show enough features to get the embedded developer interested. Then he'll look in into the sources, and see that he isn't able to port it.especially when it has no applications :)
All the best Peter
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: InterSystems CACHE FREE OODBMS DOWNLOAD - A multidimensional database that combines robust object and relational technologies, making it a perfect match for Java, C++,COM, XML, ODBC and JDBC. www.intersystems.com/match8 _______________________________________________ Pgui-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pgui-devel
