On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:20:22 -0700, Nick Sabalausky
<seewebsitetocontac...@semitwist.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 May 2013 12:41:08 -0700
"Adam Wilson" <flybo...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 20 May 2013 12:28:16 -0700, Dmitry Olshansky
<dmitry.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Markup for GUI layout seems like a decent idea.
>
HTML is markup. XAML is markup. QML is markup. XUL is markup. iOS is
markup. Android is markup. Realistically, the age of OS native
toolkits has passed, markup is the future. *shrug* For me it's a
practical thing,
And what takes that markup and actually executes it? Magical GUI
fairies? ;)
Depends on the system, in WPF the XAML is encoded into a binary form of
XML and then the objects are deserialized at runtime. Note that given D's
CTFE I would NOT choose this path for any D UI toolkit. D is perfect for a
system where you use markup to declare your UI in a CTFE manner and then
have the compiler do the dirty work of actually generating the code. Fast
AND Simple, Go D!
Markup is, by necessity, nothing more than a front-end for a
code-based GUI engine/toolkit/whatever-we-want-to-call-it. The GUI
toolkits will always be there whether it's the UI designers that use it
directly or the markup developers that use it directly.
markup is extensible, OS widgets are not.
I don't know where you got that idea.
I mean extensible in terms of look or style, sorry for the ambiguity. OS
widgets require tons of custom coding to change the style, I've done it,
and I hated every minute of it. But with WPF I don't even think twice, I
just do it, because I can get the exact style in under an hour.
--
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
