Hi Tom,

Wednesday, July 24, 2002, 8:49:41 AM, you wrote:

TS> wxWindows is a good gui tookit, no doubt. but this clip from its webpage
TS> makes it unsuitable for out purposes:

TS> "wxWindows is not a translator from one GUI from another; it cannot take
TS> a Motif application and generate a Windows application, for example. You
TS> need to learn a new API. However, the wxWindows API has been praised for
TS> its intuitiveness and simplicity, and can be far easier to learn and use
TS> than a native GUI API such as Motif or Windows. Porting from MFC is
TS> particularly easy due to its similarity: one user has ported his CASE
TS> tool from MFC to wxWindows in a couple of weeks."

I seem to read that quote from wxWindows differently than you do.  I
think what they're saying is that "it cannot take
a Motif application [written without using wxWindows] and
[automatically] generate a Windows application".  But if the
application is written using the wxWindows API, then it can be
moved from one platform to another.

TS> we require something common, i.e one api for all platforms.

This is exactly what wxWindows provides.  I used wxWindows a bit about
a year ago.  I was only programming on Windows, but my understanding
is that I could have taken my code and recompiled it on Linux or one
of the other supported platforms, and it would have run there with
(essentially) no changes.

I think wxWindows deserves a closer look.  It seems mature and stable,
has a fairly large and energetic group of people enhancing it, and
many programmer-years of effort have been expended on it.  I
especially like that it has been around about 10 years, and has wide
support, so it's unlikely to go away anytime soon.

Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
C++/Ruby Contract Programming in Silicon Valley