From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,f2cd66a22cddc54c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-08-16 02:42:48 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!washdc3-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1!bredband!uio.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail From: Preben Randhol Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: FLTK and Ada? Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 09:42:48 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology Message-ID: References: <20030814152258.5048361c.david@realityrift.com> <20030814170120.0ffa7419.dholm@gentoo.org> <20030815115340.7a9c65e2.dholm@gentoo.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1061026968 4787 129.241.83.78 (16 Aug 2003 09:42:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 09:42:48 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41558 Date: 2003-08-16T09:42:48+00:00 List-Id: Freejack wrote: > I'm just looking for something more lightweight. I do not want or need > half of the stuff that GTK throws in. And a lighter toolkit usually( > although not necessarily always ) is easier to work with. Why? I just make a Hello World application which is 25kb big. Accoring to the reference I quoted earlier the hello world application was 100kb big with FLTK, so I really don't see the advantage. > If I was building in a lot of features, then I might use GTKAda. Like I > said, it's good at what it does. But I'm the kinda guy who would rather > do a little extra work to keep the application lean and stable(such as > writing my own binding), rather than just using the nearest all in one > solution. Well I'm not going to stop you. :-) But I find it a bit waste of time to invest 6-12 months making bindings and then start making an app by the sound of it would require a weeks work and end result *may* be an executable which is perhaps 200kb smaller in size. Whereas you could have made a feature full useful app in the same time. But are you trying to say that the Gtk bindings done at ACT are not stable? > Aaaarg. Friggin GUI toolkit debates are about as bad as the perennial > Emacs vs Vi flamefest. I'm tired of listening to zealots absolutely > proscribe thier one true way of doing things. It is not that, it is that we don't need so many different GUIs. > However, if I was tackling something as large as the Ximian/Evolution > suite, then I would probably go with GTKAda. Why would one need to make something so large to use GtkAda? It all reminds me of the story from one of our other universities. An assignment was given in a computer class. Most of the girls chose to solve it using Lisp while the boys chose C. The girls finished their projects by the deadline, while the boys either gave code that didn't work or was incomplete by the deadline. So the mentality of making the smallest, fastest, leanest etc.. are not always so smart. Sometimes it is better to get the job done. And that said there are plenty other bindings which would be far more useful. F.ex bindings to make using sound in Ada applications easy. -- �I think fish is nice, but then I think that rain is wet. So who am I to judge.� - The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (radioplay)