Re: wxWindows vs. FLTK

[Juergen Fuhrmann <fuhrmann@...>]

>  Tue, 11 Feb 2003 23:27:28 +0100
>  Björn De Meyer <bjorn.demeyer@pandora.be> wrote:
>
>  Juergen Fuhrmann wrote:
>  > 
>  /snip
>  > May be  my bloat statements are a  bit drastic, so please  do not take
>  > them personally,  but LuaCheia already  seems to become  quite complex
>  > and we need to keep the ends...
>  > 
>  > Juergen
>  
>  Well, I don't want to make it a flame war BUT:
>  * To my understanding FLTK does work on MAC (at least under X,
>  possibly natively) Can ny MAC developer please confirm?
>  
>  * FLTK is tiny compared to WXWindows. It has much less dependencies. 
>  That alone makes it more suitable, even though it's less functionally 
>  complete than WXWindows.... 
>  
>  * IIRC, someone has made Lua/FLTK bindings already,...
>  

Exactly my  opinion. IMHO, we  should go with  fltk. IUP also  has the
drawback that it needs Motif/Lesstif.

Several postings mentioned tha LuaCheia should be able to install "out
of the  box" on a typical Windows/Mac/***x  machine without installing
any additional  package. I very much would  like to see this  as a the
top priority paradigm of the whole thing.

On UNIX,  the native API for  graphics emerged to be  X, but basically
there  is no  "native" GUI  which one  can canonically  rely  on.  So,
fltk/luafltk packaged  with LuaCheia could do the  job.  Concerning an
own-rolled GUI, I  am sceptical, this would need  some time to evolve,
and  we  would get  a  discussion  on what  to  put  in  and what  not
(e.g. OpenGL support would be a "must" for me...).


Juergen