From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: weis Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA12716 for caml-redistribution@pauillac.inria.fr; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 18:51:29 +0100 (MET) Resent-Message-Id: <200002231751.SAA12716@pauillac.inria.fr> Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA18802 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 09:39:29 +0100 (MET) Received: from smarthost.microsoft.com ([131.107.3.106]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA11320 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 09:39:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from ALAN-SCHM1P ([157.58.56.86]) by smarthost.microsoft.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2651.58) id 1T7FK9ZP; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 00:39:25 -0800 Received: by alan-schm1p (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 23 Feb 2000 08:36:54 +0100 From: Alan Schmitt Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 08:36:54 +0100 To: William Chesters Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: Preferred GUI Toolkit for O'Caml 3? Message-ID: <20000223083654.C6303@alan-schm1p.dns.microsoft.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Chesters , caml-list@inria.fr References: <14509.20226.13985.265187@heplix4.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> <6830.951153768@saul.cis.upenn.edu> <200002221141.LAA08806@toy.william.bogus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200002221141.LAA08806@toy.william.bogus>; from williamc@paneris.org on Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 11:41:06AM +0000 Organization: INRIA Rocquencourt Resent-From: weis@pauillac.inria.fr Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 18:51:29 +0100 Resent-To: caml-redistribution@pauillac.inria.fr Hi, I'm not sure QT would be so nice to use, since the first problem would consist of writing the bindings for caml (unless I'm mistaken and they already exist). I think the best target is definitely gtk, since it runs under linux and win32, a port on BeOS is in the works, and it is fairly widely used. Alan Schmitt >Benjamin C. Pierce writes: > > We in the Unison group are also about to embark on a major UI redesign > > and have been wondering which toolkit to use. Besides Thorsten's > > points, there are two more that are critical concerns for us: > > > > * seamless portability (Unix and Win32) > > * ability to build statically linked binaries (this is a pretty > > big drawback to the Tk-based solutions) > > > > Comments on these points as well as the others would be very useful. > >There's always QT. It's nice to work with (at least in C++), very >widely used and comprehensive (because of KDE), and was written from >the start to be cross-platform (X & Win). NB it is uncontroversially >free these days. -- The hacker: someone who figured things out and made something cool happen.