"Tom Sawyer" <transami / transami.net> wrote in message
news:200302061800.52047.transami / transami.net...
>
> > But we're talking about building a GUI on it so that may not be an
issue,
> > though personally I probably wouldn't work on a project which used Flash
> > as the basis of a GUI primarily because it is a closed standard, while I
> > would consider (if I had the time, so I'm speaking hypothetically here)
> > building a GUI using SVG which is an open standard... but that's just my
> > opinion.
>
> so i'm polling here. i am working on a Ruby GUI, and it is in the very
early
> stages. right now i am planning to use the GGI api for graphics rendering.
> what are the merits of SVG compared to something like GGI? what would be
the
> draw in using one over the other? can SVG reasonably accomadate a GUI
> toolkit? could both SVG and GGI be used together seemlessly? by the way,
GGI
> dosn't do font rendering and i was looking at using FreeType2 for that.
>
> please advise.

This fairly new /. article has a good summary but seems to be missing
GLGooey

http://ask.slashdot.org/askslashdot/02/12/24/1813219.shtml?tid=156

Someone mentions rendering widgets on textures - this is the kind of stuff
I'd like to see but which non-one is doing.

I looked af FLTK 1.x on Windows. It's generally clean and fast - it does not
abuse the CPU and do not have the rendering glitches that Fox sometimes
has - like a delayed flash of the entire GUI when selecting a menu (or
something like that). But in the demo I looked at, edit box did not
understand ctrl+Z for undo and similar. I guess you could add this though.
tabs in dialogs holding a text box would create a tab instead of tabbing to
next control. A button with focus will be pushed by space instead of enter -
enter works like tab. Scroll-bars are missing a gray line making them look a
little odd.
In 2.0 there will be multiple rendering devices with OpenGL and native
Windows/Mac OS-X support. I don't know how the Fltk 1.x is rendered on
Windows, but demos do show OpenGL GUI without hogging CPU.
Generally I think the rendering technology is good, but platform
compatibility must be better - it's not a matter of native vs. non-native
rendering. The response to user input events must match the platform.
I guess these things can be fixed when implementing the application, but it
is annoying.
I noticed an add-on to Fox that improves the way connections are attached to
GUI actions to handle click events - that removes one important problem
where it would otherwise be difficult to use member functions as event
targets.

Overall FLTK leaves a fairly good impression - you can certainly make useful
GUI's.
I guess I'd still prefer the Fox GUI though.

However, if I were about to write my own OpenGL widgets, I would seriously
consider using FLTK as a foundation.

wxWindows: I never actually downloaded and tested it, but it's fairly large
and smells a lot like MFC which isn't a good thing. MFC is ok, but old.

Mikkel