caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* RE: CamlTk and LablTk
@ 2000-06-01 16:44 Dave Berry
  2000-06-03  8:16 ` Pierre Weis
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Dave Berry @ 2000-06-01 16:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Pierre Weis; +Cc: caml-list

(I hope you don't mind me replying to a fairly old message).

This was a very interesting question, and the examples that Pierre included
were illuminating.  Would it be possible to elucidate a little further?  In
particular, I'd appreciate it if someone could give the types of the
relevant functions in each library.  (At some point one has to look at the
documentation for all the details, but this seems like a reasonably
educational example to take a little further).

Let's compare the two calls to create_oval.  First the Caml/TK:
      Canvas.create_oval c
        (Pixels (cx - wx)) (Pixels (cy - wy))
        (Pixels (cx + wx)) (Pixels (cy + wy))
        [Outline (NamedColor "black"); Width (Pixels 7);
         FillColor (NamedColor "white")]
Second the Labl/TK:
    Canvas.create_oval
        ~x1:(cx - wx) ~y1:(cy - wy)
        ~x2:(cx + wx) ~y2:(cy + wy) 
        ~outline: `Black ~width: 7
        ~fill: `White

It seems that Labl/TK is using labels in two ways.  First, to have named
arguments, so that you can see which position is x1, which is y1, etc.
Second, to handle optional arguments.  Where Caml/TK takes a list of
attributes, Labl/TK takes extra parameters.  I assume that this is where
Labl/TK has better type checking.  Does the type of each function list the
optional parameters that it may take?  : Doesn't this lead to large types
for each function? (I don't know O'Labl at all well).

Dave.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* CamlTk and LablTk
@ 2000-05-18 17:37 Georges MARIANO
  2000-05-22 14:57 ` Pierre Weis
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Georges MARIANO @ 2000-05-18 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: caml-list

Hello everyone,

very short question :

How can we compare camltk and labltk ??
(functionalities, ease of writing (complex) GUI, portability,
integration in Ocaml-3.00,  ...)

I know that this question would result in a flame war but I
hope that we can be smart enough to avoid it ;-)
Just help the puzzled user please...

-- 
> Georges MARIANO                 tel: (33) 03 20 43 84 06
> INRETS, 20 rue Elisee Reclus    fax: (33) 03 20 43 83 59
> 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq         mailto:mariano@terre.inrets.fr
> FRANCE.                         
> http://www3.inrets.fr/Public/ESTAS/Mariano.Georges/
> http://www3.inrets.fr/BUGhome.html         mailto:Bforum@estas1.inrets.fr




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2000-06-03  8:56 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-06-01 16:44 CamlTk and LablTk Dave Berry
2000-06-03  8:16 ` Pierre Weis
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-05-18 17:37 Georges MARIANO
2000-05-22 14:57 ` Pierre Weis

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).