From: Axel S. <A....@ke...> - 2005-04-14 15:10:56
|
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 15:51 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 15:29 +0100, Axel Simon wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 14:57 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote: > > > Some things that have changed since the last submission: > > > * we've released 0.9.7 and 0.9.7.1 > > > * Mozilla rendering engine widget binding > > > * now uses heirarchical modules names > > > * Gtk+ does adopt it's look and feel to the platform (which was > > > not previously true). So that's another improvement vs. > > > wxHaskell. :-) > > Well. Gtk ships with an improved theme on Windows. Look-and-feel is > > inherently incompatible with Aqua (Mac OS). > > I think it's safe to call it native look on Windows. Native look and > feel is probably slightly harder to justify. > > And of course you're right, Gtk+ on MacOS X is much less native looking > than it is on Windows. What makes it inherently incompatible? Are the > Gtk+ people banned from using an Aqua-like theme or something? Aqua only has one menu bar for starters. Another principal problem is that the Aqua widget set is a bit different (lists for example). > (I hear people are working on a MacOS X port of Gtk+ that will use > Quartz rather than X.) Really? I know there was an effort once for Gtk 1.2, but that stalled. > For people trying to write portable apps, I think Linux/Unix and Windows > are the prime targets. And it still works on OS X (though I've never > seen it). Do we have any screenshots? It certainly works. I could do some. > > I'll see if I can get rid of the Mogul stuff this weekend. > > Ok. > > Hold off on any tree/list property stuff for the moment as I'm doing > some code/docs tidying in those modules. I'm happy to do nothing for now! Axel. |