nanogui: W Window system?
Subject:
Re: W Window system?
From:
"Greg Haerr" ####@####.####
Date:
10 May 2000 03:01:11 -0000
Message-Id: <04df01bfba2b$f9f1d9c0$15320cd0@gregh>
: Though I was curious about the GPLing of W windows(and Yopy's possible
: infringement), I was also curious what the developers on the this mailing
: list think about the technical capabilities of W and it's bearing on
: Microwindows / NanoGUI.
:
: The screen shots of the Yopy in action did show a Win9x/NT/CE like
: interface (eeww) but it did seem to have nice things like dialog boxes,
: buttons, etc.
I think that W is interesting because it has been chosen by a company
to host the graphics runtime for a Linux based PDA. I have reviewed
W, albeit a little quickly, and here is my assessment:
o W is an older technology, and was mostly completed in 1996.
Although it does have some things that Microwindows doesn't, like
pie, arc and chord, it lacks any color (this has yet to be back-contributed
by Yopy) and runs only on mono or 8bpp systems. W does not
have a sophisticated design in regards to screen, mouse and kbd drivers,
and many routines are duplicated for the w2xlib (W to Xlib) layer,
which enables W to run on X. The architecture doesn't allow for exact
duplication under X, instead, for instance, the entire pie routine is replaced.
W's driver architecture is ill-suited towards adding the 1 thru 32 bpp
framebuffer drivers that will be required to run on arbitrary embedded
linux installations.
o W does have quite a few good sample programs, as well as some
very interesting usable examples, including testing routines for most of
it's drawing functions, as well as an included html browser. Microwindows
could definitely use some help in this area.
o W is designed as yet-another-api (YAA), while Microwindows
attempts to model existing APIs more closely. This means that bringing
up external widget sets like gdk and fltk are more work, although W
includes a widget set, and Microwindows does not.
Overall, I am impressed with what W has been able to accomplish,
by including a usable widget set internally, and having many example
programs. However, I'm still fighting to try to get it running on my
system, and haven't successfully got past that point yet, so I can't
actually use it. Also, development seems to have stopped for
two years except for extremely recently, and all the original
developers have resigned from the project.
:
: As I understand it, FLTK and GTK are being ported to MWindows? (These will
: support the wonderful widgets we all so desire?).
Yep. I have arranged some $$ to help finance some porting
projects for the fltk and gtk+/gdk widgets, so I'm going to be
able to actually pay people to work on some projects ;-)
W doesn't seem to have
: this "flexibility" to use different widgets? Comments?
true
Regards,
Greg
