> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Philippe A. Bouchard > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 4:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [boost] Re: GUI sublanguage ? > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [...] > > > After having followed this thread I wander if we are trying to > > reinvent > > the wheel. By googling a bit one can find plenty of "Gui Toolkits" and > > here I saw little of them. Not a word on Qt, for example. I never > > used it for an important project but they give a (good ?) solution for > > example to the layout issues discussed so far. > > If I should criticize them (as a lazy user who is in troble finding > > his way among all those features) if the fact that there are huge > > classes that probably need further decomposition of resposibilities. > > > > Anyway Qt make life simple for simple apps and provides something > > that scales quite well for larger projects (I haven't used it but > > I can use KDE as witness). > > > > So I would like to have a clearer idea of the difference between > > the goal of this thread and existing solutions (i.e. Qt). > > At some degree it becomes political issues. I doubt Boost would want to > take the same risky path I took (Corel). >
Qt is a commercial library for one thing. For another, developing a platform independent GUI environment is only half of our purpose. The other is to leverage modern C++ techniques to simplify making GUIs. A quick glance at Qt's class hierarchy should be enough to see that they are not using such a design: http://www.trolltech.com/images/classchart.gif. Brock _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
