Subj : Re: wxWidgets
To   : comp.programming
From : Rob Thorpe
Date : Tue Jul 05 2005 08:05 am

Rene Moehring wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2005 03:43:28 -0700, Rob Thorpe wrote:
> > Phlip wrote:
> >> Rob Thorpe wrote:
> >>
> >> > Personally I find it very tiresome that libraries like wxWidgets force
> >> > the user to use C++ and the object-orientated paradigm exclusively to
> >> > write GUI code.
> >>
> >> I hate it when a library written in OCaml forces an OCaml paradigm on me,
> >> just to use it. What were they thinking??
> >>
> >> ;-)
> >
> > Oddly enough I've never had that problem :)
> >
> > My point is that it wxWindows would be much more useful if it was a
> > library providing a set of library calls.  That way it could be used
> > with any language.    Object-orientated wrappers could be written for
> > C++ and other OO languages.
> >
>
> That would be very strange since wxWidgets is warapper for native widget
> sets. So that would mean a wrapper written in c++ wrapped in what you
> call library calls that have to be wrapped to be used in c++!

Below everything is the native interface itself.  Above that could be a
portable library that provides a set of calls that can be used by any
language (probably not a C++ library) then above that a C++ wrapper
library.  That's only two levels of wrapping.

> There simply has to be a point where the wrapping stops.

Yes, but you can use quite a lot of it.  X uses a very complex
mechanism of bringing windows to the screen and is still fast.  Even
the basic Win32 API wraps itself at times, ie function calls
post-messages themselves which are processed elsewhere.

.