Re: GUI in Ada

[Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1861 bytes --]

dennison@telepath.com writes:
> In article <360196CB.9EC3F20F@altoetting-online.de>,
>   "Gerhard H�ring" <gerhard.haering@altoetting-online.de> wrote:
> > *both* Unix and Windows. I use TASH, an Ada binding to TCL/TK, a script
> > language. Both the binding and TCL/TK are free, I recommend you also use
> > Visual TCL to build your GUI.
> >
> > Disadvantages:
> > You have to learn TCL, but it is a very simple language.
> > Advantages:
> > Compile your Ada source for Unix, Windows or Mac, use your TCL code in
> > Unix, Windows or Mac. No additional porting required!! Easy GUI
> > building: not as easy as Visual Basic, but at least as easy as building
> > GUI apps in (Visual) C++, for example. TCL/TK and most tools (Visual TCL
> > e.g.) are freeware.
> 
> Wow. You sure didn't try real hard to find "Disadvantages". :-)
> 
> Is it still limited to compatability with only one or two compilers? I seem
> to remember that being a problem. Lack of available tech support could be an
> issue for some. There *are* some incompatabilities between the different
> versions of TCL (I'm not so sure about TK).
> 
> That being said, I personally consider TASH one of the most promising
> technologies for writing truly portable code in Ada. Its a shame it isn't
> being worked on more vigorously.
> 

I consider TASH pretty promising, too.  However, IMHO it is too
tightly bound to TCL and TK.  I'm currently working on extending my
ASL toolkit to support a more unbundled widget toolset.  I'm looking
at Tk and Java AWT for the underlying widget set so the code should be
very portable.  I'm currently studying the issue and prototyping some,
but the problem doesn't look insurmountable.  Expect a preliminary
release in a few weeks.

-- 
Corey Minyard               Internet:  minyard@acm.org
  Work: minyard@nortel.ca       UUCP:  minyard@wf-rch.cirr.com