Re: How about porting to C++ iostreams?

[Scott J. <joh...@ve...>]

Hi Eduard,

If someone had the interest in doing this, and was willing to put some 
effort into testing it, I would accept the patch, and do my own testing 
as well.  The current solution was arrived at incrementally.  The 
iostream's of libg++ in the 90's were a stable and efficient thing, 
whereas the migration to ANSI standard  iostreams (by libstdc++) took a 
while.  The best solution at the time was to hold on to the old way.

The original ibuild will mostly likely still compile on top of ivtools. 
  But the focus of ivtools is the drawing editors, not the user 
interface widgets (which have not proven popular in the free software 
world).  And ibuild was never updated to work with the glyphs of 
InterViews 3.1, so it is only useful as a GUI builder for InterViews 
2.6 Interactors.

Thanks for your interest in ivtools,   So where did IV3.1-nls come from?

Scott Johnston
http://www.ivtools.org

On Apr 3, 2005, at 12:25 AM, Eduard Votapek wrote:

> Hi friends,
>
> recently i've looked at the newest ivtools.
> Well, i think the method of wrapping all around the
> old headers is quite ugly.
>
> How about doing a straigt replacement of the
> old InterViews with the new headers?
>
> Currently i'm doing this work on my old IV3.1-nls
> with some fixes inside, to use it with gcc-3.4.3.
> I'm using IV since one of it's first versions
> in '92 ... (this should tell all :-)
>
> BTW, does anybody know where and why ibuild
> did disappear from ivtools?
>
> regards, Eduard
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real 
> users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Ivtools-devel mailing list
> Ivt...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ivtools-devel
>