On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 11:57:05 +0100
Wolfgang Jeltsch
I never meant not to use an existing toolkit. In fact, I always meant that we should use existing "native" toolkits/libraries in order to achieve platform look-and-feel etc.
I am not sure to have understood what's going on. If there is a C backend yet to be written, on top of wich implement an Haskell layer, why not reuse the unix part, writing just a native backend for gtk2/win32? It would reuse a lot of code, and would simultaneously solve a big problem for the many gtk apps out there, written in various languages: having a reasonable look on windows (and the same idea holds for quartz, too). Indeed, it would solve the problem of writing the C backend for linux and bsd, too. I know that many people, reading this, will just think "no, rewriting our C lowlevel library is easier because it will exacly fit our needs" but, believe, it's just the not-done-by-myself syndrome already mentioned on this list :) I don't think that designing a C backend for an UI will look (from the programmer's point of view) different from gtk. BTW, I think that this backend can be comfortably written in haskell, since there is a binding for win32 and one for gtk, we could just abstract etc etc. In fact, If I had to bet on what will happen in the next two years, I would surely bet on objectIO implemented directly over the win32 API and over the gtk2 API, but there's no bookmaker here now :) Vincenzo -- Teatri vuoti e inutili potrebbero affollarsi se tu ti proponessi di recitare te [CCCP]