>
> we looked at wxWindows about a year ago, but at the time it wasn't ready
> for our needs. they've come a long way since then and if we were starting
> from scratch today, our answer might be different....
>
> jeff
In fact there is nothing stopping anyone from putting together
a port which is based on wxWindow (or any other x-platform
gui library). Almost all of the platform dependant code
is in the GUI layering, and different GUI's need different
code, regardless of if the GUI itself uses a cross platform
library.
I would say take up the challenge and try to do a port of
AbiWord using the wxWindows library .. then see if it works
better than the existing one. All it costs you is some time,
and in the end makes AbiWord a better product (I'm a firm
believer that the more compilers and platforms you put your
code through the better it will be).
Thomas
> At 11:46 AM 7/16/99 -0700, Tom Ryan wrote:
> >Eric,
> >
> >> Our approach is philosophically different from uniform platform
> >> abstraction libraries like wxWindows or AWT.
> >
> >Have you taken a close look at wxWindows? It is very different
> >from AWT and I think it actually would fit the AbiWord model very nicely.
> >wxWindows applications have the native look and feel of the target
> >OS because they the native GUI for rendering.
> >
> >> Most XP toolkits attempt
> >> to create an abstraction layer which is wide enough to accomodate
> >> virtually all platform-specific functionality. In our approach, we've
> >> simply admitted that platform-specific code needs to exist, and we've
> >> adopted a system which helps us deal with it, rather than adopting a
> >> system which helps us try to avoid it. We still use abstraction to
> >> hide platform-specific code, but not pervasively so.
> >
> >The point of using reusable tools is not to "avoid" writing platform
> >specific code, rather it enables many developers that are trying to
> >solve the same XP issues to work together for the common good.
> >
> >What concerns me is that there are so many duplicate porting
> >efforts going on right now. Mozilla has their XP library, AbiWord
> >has theirs, etc, etc, etc., etc.
> >
> >I understand that if there are no existing tools that solve a particular
> >problem, you may need it improvise. I don't think that that is the
> >case today. If we can all get together as an industry, we can
> >eliminate much of that duplication of efforts and truly make the
> >"Cross Platform Platform" a viable option for developers. Failing
> >that, there will be a few fragmented XP efforts and a lot of wasted
> >effort writing duplicate code and we will all be forced to use
> >Windows 2010.
> >
> >I agree with a lot of what you said on your web page about the
> >importance of supporting multiple platforms, but if every application
> >has to do application specific ports to each OS, it is going to
> >dramatically reduce the viability of developing for multiple platforms.
> >
> >To put it another way, wouldn't it be better if the time spent porting
> >AbiWord to new platforms was instead spent on adding new
> >features, improving the installer, etc., etc, etc.?
> >
> >I think projects like AbiWord are leading the way for cross platform
> >development, but we need to look at the big picture by encouraging
> >the use of tools that will benefit all XP developers. I believe that can
> >be done with available tools, without compromising the quality of
> >the resulting applications.
> >
> >...just my 2.5 cents.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Tom Ryan
> >+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> >| SciTech Software - Building Truly Plug'n'Play Software -- Today! |
> >+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> >| Tom Ryan, Director of Marketing | Ph/FAX: 530-894-8400/530-894-9069 |
> >| SciTech Software, Inc. | Email : TomR@scitechsoft.com |
> >| 505 Wall Street | ftp : ftp.scitechsoft.com |
> >| Chico, CA 95928 | www : http://www.scitechsoft.com |
> >+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> >
>