You'll always see pushback against GUI libraries. Java's GUI libraries, though flawed, are better than anything in C++. I agree with Bjørn, just make your decisions. No committee. Then see if anyone likes it. It's way to easy to over-design something like this. I imagine the only way it would really work out well is if one lead programmer made all of the hard decisions, and had about 5 different experienced UI or library programmers implementing the innards. Oh, and in your code, you may want to consider allowing the programmer to just define, say, a BOOST_GUI_WIN32 macro, instead of passing around Win32 and GTK objects - as I think you were doing in the samples. Good luck. Jeremy Pack On 10/22/07, Marc Mutz <marc@kdab.net> wrote:
On Sunday October 21 2007 13:53, Bjørn Roald wrote:
Maybe if someone came up with a real, far from perfect, but decent proposal, 11 out of 10 would turn out to be fairly forgiving for a not-so-perfect-in-my-eyes design. As pointed out, it is about time something gets moving toward standardization on GUI. Boost.GUI would be a good start.
I think the Java example has shown very nicely that you can't standardize GUIs even if the language is controlled by a single company. And the needs of the C++ community are much more diverse than those of the Java community.
Personally, I'm certain that no standardization effort is going to be wasted on something like GUIs for _a very long time_ to come :)
Thanks, Marc
-- Marc Mutz - marc@kdab.com, mutz@kde.org - Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB Platform-independent software solutions - www.kdab.com info@kdab.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman /listinfo.cgi/boost