I agree FOX isn't the sexiest toolkit, I mainly use it because it's the one that works out of the box with the one-click installer.
wxRuby wraps wxWidgets and has more of that pizzazz. Installing either on Linux is, of course, a breeze, but on Windows, the path of least resistance is FXRuby. I like FOX over wx because the programming model is much cleaner than wx's. Had I infinite time I'd build more modern-looking widgets (like a Ribbon control, for example) for the FOX toolkit. IOW, I am judging FOX by: (a) ease of installation of FXRuby on all platforms (vs wxRuby, which is a bit of a bear on Windows because of the compiler situation), and (b) the merits of the design of the underlying framework code. Aesthetics can always been improved when the underlying framework is well designed. Qt is a great cross-platform toolkit with both pizzaz and ease of installation, and I would probably use it over either wx or FOX if I were coding purely in C++ (allowing that Trolltech's Qt is not "pure" C++ in that it relies on a preprocessor rather heavily). There is a Qt-Ruby binding but I have not yet used it. Maybe I'll give it a whirl... - Bob On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Malcolm Greene <[email protected]> wrote: > Bob, > >> I use FXRuby as the GUI toolkit for any desktop applications I build in >> Ruby. FXRuby is based on the FOX C++ toolkit. > > Thanks for that link. The toolkit looks powerful, but seems to lack the > pizazz required for delivering commercial products. Reminds me of > Windows 95 UI's. > > I'm referencing the page for my impression of FXRuby's UI. > http://www.fxruby.org/doc/examples.html > > Malcolm > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
