This isn't really fair to Mono Windows Forms.
On Windows, at least, it works quite well except for some buggy table
layout behavior.
Some of the controls are painted using the XP and above theming as well.
I did use it in a commercial product for a while (granted, a free tool
for not-free
On 4/26/2013 10:50 AM, Jonathan Pryor wrote:
So on the one platform for which it doesn't use it's own theming and instead
uses the platform theming (it uses WinAPI ~directly), it looks good.
Great.
That also happens to be the platform which has it's own native
System.Windows.Forms
On Apr 26, 2013, at 9:45 AM, James Bellinger ja...@illusorystudios.com wrote:
Other than that it's really very usable. [On Windows, at least.]
So on the one platform for which it doesn't use it's own theming and instead
uses the platform theming (it uses WinAPI ~directly), it looks good.
On Apr 26, 2013, at 11:01 AM, James Bellinger ja...@illusorystudios.com wrote:
This really suggests WinForms ought to be made to look better on other
platforms instead of diffusing the needed effort to end users and forcing
them to maintain more code.
Arguably true, except:
1. Nobody has
Hi Alexandre,
WinForms is specific to Microsoft platform. Additionally, it will require
license too.
The purpose of using GTK or Mono is specifically because of the cross
platform compatibility.
Regards,
Rauf
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:00:28 +0600
From: ?
XWT maybe? Don't know though whether it's mature enough.
On śro, 2013-04-24 at 13:09 +0100, Rauf Butt wrote:
Hi Alexandre,
WinForms is specific to Microsoft platform. Additionally, it will
require license too.
The purpose of using GTK or Mono is specifically because of the cross
On Apr 24, 2013, at 8:09 AM, Rauf Butt raufb...@gmail.com wrote:
WinForms is specific to Microsoft platform. Additionally, it will require
license too.
System.Windows.Forms is implemented on Mono. It looks like Windows 95, has
rendering issues, and is generally user-hostile, but it DOES
