Re: OCaml's long range graphical direction?

[Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>]

On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> From: Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>
> > That said, we still have 2 gtk+ bindings, at least.
> > It seems lablgtk is more complete and may have more active support, due maybe
> > because jacques as more time to devote to it than i and pascal cuoq do.
> > But still mlgtk seems more easy to understand and to use, needing less
> > understanding of the convoluted class and methods system that lablgtk uses.
> > Both lack good documentation, well apart from the source that is.
> 
> This convoluted class and method system is intended to make using
> lablgtk easier on the long term :-)
> In fact, people seem to be coping with it OK. That is, I didn't get
> that many questions on it. But certainly, there is a huge deficit in
> documentation.

I just hack on the examples, but surely a bit more documentation would
help. This might be good Consortium work, or even fixable with a volunteer 
effort. 

After all of the admonitions against the use of Obj.magic it's a bit
disconcerting to count 41 Obj.magic usages in lablgtk. I recall
hearing that that will change. What's the plan?

-- Brian