Hi Bill, Mike and all, When and if it boils down to a choice between GTK 1.0 or 2.0 we should go for 2.0. Especially if you design your GUI with the Glade UI-design / Anjuta IDE tools. Files created with the Glade 1.0 code generation utility are not upward compatible to 2.0 (yeah, a real bummer). A lot of widgets from GTK 1.0 are deprecated as well. If you are to use the Glade UI-design tool, implement the callbacks/signal handlers with libglade (Glade 1.0 xml files (for GUI description) can be translated to Glade 2.0). Libglade allows for dynamically loading of GUI widgets, so you change the GUI at run time. So it boils down to: Design the UI with Glade 2.0 and complete the UI code with the use of libglade for callbacks and signal handling (with the Anjuta IDE, or vi, or emacs, or whatever other editor you can think of). It is generally discouraged to use the Glade code generation utility. For more information look at: http://developer.gnome.org and http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/libglade/index.html Just my EUR 0.01 Kind regards, Bert Timmerman. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-geda-dev@seul.org@CORUS On Behalf Of Bill Cox > <bill@viasic.com> > Sent: woensdag 11 augustus 2004 16:03 > To: geda-dev@seul.org > Subject: Re: gEDA: SPICE GUI > > On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 03:05, MSWaters wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > According to the Qt Web site it is free for the development of free > software > > which is good. Even so I'm a little uneasy trusting my fate into the > hands of > > a commercial organisation since of necessity their basic goal in life > must be > > to make money. My basic goal here is write software, I'd rather aline > myself > > with an organisation with this same goal. > > You're right... Qt is GPL'd, just like most of our code. But, in > addition, they let commercial companies use it for a fee. That seems > reasonable to me. In comparison, wxWidgets is basically free for use > either in commercial software or GPL'd software. > > > The port of wxWidgets I'm using to develop gspiceui is based on GTK+. > How they > > do it for M$Windows or MAC I don't know. > > > > Mike > > I believe they've done direct implementations of wxWidgets to the basic > primitives available on each platform. This is good for speed, but > probably causes some inconsistencies across platforms. > > It seems to me that the most popular GUI choices are: > > - GTK (1.0 or 2.0) > - Qt > - wxWidgets > > There seem to be three main criteria for choosing: > > - Usability > - Licensing > - Long-term outlook > > I've used GTK enough to know that I'm not a fan. I much prefer the > functionality MFC from Microsoft. I haven't used Qt or wxWidgets, but > it would be great to hear from someone who's used both. > > Of these, wxWidgets seems to have the least restrictive license (you can > sell binary code derived from their source), followed by GTK (GNU > Library license), and Qt (straight GPL). > > I feel the Qt restriction is significant. It's likely that some of the > future open-source EDA efforts will be available both as GPL'd source > and as commercial products. Thus, it hurts the open-source EDA effort > to standardize on a pure GPL GUI toolkit. > > As for long-term outlook, GTK is clearly here to stay, and Qt has a long > history and is supported by a real company. It sounds like wxWidgets > almost died in the 90's but then came back to life. It's going strong > now, and gaining momentum. IMO, picking a winner is key. Otherwise, we > could all be maintaining and porting an obscure GUI toolkit for years. > > Bill > >
<<application/ms-tnef>>