Re: FLTK?

["Adam D. Moss" <adam@...>]

Enrico Tassi wrote:
> Thinking at the memory consumption and the binary dimension of a LUA
> interpreter I think the best choice is FLTK. I'm not an FLTK guru and
> I've never used them in a real project, but AFAIK they are small and
> portable across Unix, Win and OSX.
>
> Does anyone agree with me?

I agree with you that if you want to bind a mature toolkit
where size is a significant issue (and portability, naturally)
then FLTK seems amongst best choices.

I've some FLTK (v1.1) experience and in some ways it's archaic
and obtuse, but the nice size and license can't be argued with. :)
It's hardly ugly at all with the 'plastic' theme, either.

A lot of the size advantage goes away if you bind the *whole*
API, but it still beats most others I've tried.

All that said, I don't think I actually have a pressing need
for a Lua binding of FLTK, but I might find myself using one
if it existed.

--adam
--
Adam D. Moss   -   adam@gimp.org