Topic: Believe It Or Not !!!

[meandean]

  James, I know you're working with FLTK now, so this may be a little after the fact.
The old DOS Editor was designed for use with a mouse, but it was coded in the day
when 100% keyboard functionality was still a mandate; with a few important keys,
you could navigate through a menu or complex filesystem and select a file 10
sub-directories deep without typing a single letter...

[James]

That's cool. I know what you mean. But you also have to take into account that it was written for DOS only. I could probably come up with something similar, but it would have to work in UNIX too. Plus I would have to write mouse trapping routines. I really don't want to write all of that stuff.

James. 

[James]

boing oing oing

So, Alec, is that your first laser woodie? 

James. 

[meandean]

  So this FLTK will spare you of all that, allowing multi-platform file navigation???

[James]

Absolutely !!!

It is a complete set of windowing widgets that work in any OS that uses X, Xfree86, MacOS, or Win32. That's pretty much all of them!

It even has a visual forms builder called FLUID, that I won't be using.

I don't know.... I might use it. So far, it's just been a way to get some examples and ideas.

James. 

[James]

I'm sitting here with two copies of Dev-C++ open; one with LaserBoy in it and another with example code. Beside me is a laptop running Linux and I'm testing my compile in both Windows and Linux. Linux keeps asking for X11 stuff! Oh well. At least it compiles completely with no errors or warnings! I think the issue is that FLTK takes full advantage of RGBA and it actually uses the alpha channel! So you can't just ignore it. I've also found that using 0x00RRGGBB is not right. It seems to want 0x00BBGGRR. However.... I am concerned that this might be an endian issue. I think what it really wants is 0xRRGGBBAA and it's getting it backwards!

All I can say is......

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! 

James. 

[drlava]

Great James.  Please DO use FLUID, you (or whoever works on it) will thank you later when the UI is to be expanded.  This was also a big reason why you separated the GUI code from the operating code in the first place.

[BlinkenLights]

[James]

Just out of curiosity....

Since FLTK IS a Win32 GUI development environment, would you (Gary) have any interest in checking it out?

You already have a lot of visual development skills; far beyoun mine.

I'd like to see what you think of it and what you can do with it.

James. 

[Fanny Pack]

I just spent a little time browsing some of the documentation and going through the class library.  How well it works, I have no idea, but there appears to be plenty there to come up with a nice GUI.  I wouldn't call it a Win32 environment by any stretch of the imagination, though.  It's more similar to what MS tried to do with MFC, if anything.

I don't have any interest in doing anything with it, though.  For multi-platform work I can see the advantage of it but for Windows only work it doesn't seem like the best tool for the job.

[BlinkenLights]

nope.. visual studio is by far a better environment for win32 only programing. unless you want to do something outside the box.

however.. FLTK compiles in visual c++ express and as a matter of fact, it comes with the VS project file (thats how i built it)

the only difference between working in FLTK and working with .net is nothing.. one is c# the other is c++..

FLTK libraries can easily be included in VS projects..

there is a bit more to it than just that, but my point is that you can use FLTK in MSVS

[Fanny Pack]

Yep, because it is C++ code.  But using it solely for the purpose of creating a Windows application would be like learning to speak Klingon because you are going to a Star Trek convention and you want to be able to talk to the hard core fans.  No need, because english is their native language.  On the other hand, if you were going to an international Star Trek convention and Klingon was the only common language, it would definitely make sense.  In the first case, you would end up being adequately able to communicate but would sure fall short of being able to express yourself if you all just spoke english.  In the latter case, being as how you wouldn't be able to communicate otherwise, the inadequacy of it all can be overlooked.  But, in no case will you be able to express yourself as well as if you all communicated using your native tongues.

[BlinkenLights]

but c++ is a universal language. .Net is more like klingon...

.net allows you to speak to other .net aware OSs (aka windows 2000 and up) where as c++ allows you to speak to all OSs. Windows can speak .net and c++ ( and others). if you look at it.. c++ = english and .net is klingon.

[James]

Bravo!

Good analogy!

C# is derived from C++ not the other way around!

C# is OK, I guess. 

But don't you really have to know C++ to get it? 

James. 

[Fanny Pack]

If you think about how computers actually work, what you are saying makes no sense.  The only thing that "speaks" C++ is a C++ compiler and unless someone writes one for some specific computer, that computer isn't going to do anything with it.  It is entirely possible to write a C++ compiler entirely in C# and run that application on Linux that has MONO installed.