Re: GNUstep Window Manager (was RE: Idea)

[Helge Hess]

Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
> You seem to have missed the main point ... that we can't easily incorporate 
> the best of
> other toolkits, but would realistically have to adopt them as a whole!

Yes, of course. See GToolKit on one approach (which certainly could be
improved). As I said, gstep-gui might need to be dropped - I'm not
talking about a gtk+ 'backend' (though this is somewhat technically
interesting)

> As for the Qt comparison - that's a bit like flamebait in a gnustep 
> discussion list.
> Of course, from the point of view of the aims of the GNUstep project, 
> gstep-gui had
> better feature completeness years ago than Qt does now, and (while time to 
> completion
> is impossible to give becuse it depends on developers working on the project) 
> I'd
> judge that gstep-gui could be staable long before Qt could be 
> feature-complete.

Really ? Ok, we'll see.

Notably I'm not a big fan of either Qt or gtk+, I only see that real,
usable applications are written in those toolkits. I've yet to see a
'real' GNUstep (UI) application.
BTW: *The* killer application for me would be Diagram.

> > I think this was already discussed one time in the past ;-) Using glib
> > in gstep-base would at least easen using gtk+ in gstep-gui.
> 
> But at a loss of efficiency in GNUstep apps (or hard work avoiding that) ... 
> it would
> be much more effective to alter gtk+ to use the base library (if we wanted to 
> use gtk+).

IMHO most effective would be using them side-by-side. Basing gtk+ on
gstep-base seems completly weird to me (except if gstep-base would turn
to sth like CoreFoundation).

Greetings
  Helge