This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the eCos project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: FOSDEM 2003 report


David N. Welton wrote:
Jonathan Larmour <jifl at eCosCentric dot com> writes:


David N. Welton wrote:


However I know Bart has plans to try and do more TCL/Tk things,
particularly given the future requirements of CDL scripts. However
pretty much everyone else doesn't like the non-native
look-and-feel of TK widgets.


My impression was that modern Tcl/Tk versions have pretty good
native look and feel on Windows.


The omens aren't good on Unix when it comes to GNOME/GTK or KDE, but
perhaps that's a little too much to hope :-).


What do you mean?  Tk certainly doesn't look like either one of those,
at this point, but that's to be expected.

Yes, but really it should fit in nicely in whichever environment it is used in. Right now it has the same look-and-feel as when people thought Motif was cool and whizzy because it meant you didn't have to write X11 directly.


Does anyone have an example of a really good Tk app on Windows? With
screen shots? I've found TkPaint
<http://mars.netanya.ac.il/~samy/tkpaint.html> which I admit looks
better than I remember from the last time I ran TCL, but some of the
fonts still look odd for example (could be that particularl user's
setup).


Here are some screenshots provided by a friend of mine.  Not in
English, but you can see how things look visually.

http://www.dq-e.com/_data/dqe1.png
http://www.dq-e.com/_data/dqe2.png
http://www.dq-e.com/_data/dqe3.png

That does look a lot better than I remember it being before.


Although the other factor I didn't mention but is relevant to
consider is drawing/update speed. Tk apps have had a tendency to
feel slow and clunky. If this is all resolved then indeed going with
Tk would be perfectly alright IMO!

Tcl and Tk are only getting faster, and so are modern computers.

Well, you would _hope_ any software including Tcl/TK would only get faster, but not all software does as it gets more worked on!


Something like this: http://mini.net/tcl/8572 certainly doesn't run as
fast as it would in C, but I think that for non
computationally-intensive GUI's, Tk is more than adequate.

It's more to do with things like response time when using menus and so on rather than graphics performance per se.


I just had a quick look at tkCVS on Windows as an experiment, to put my money where my mouth is rather than appearing to whinge from the sidelines :-). It has a few oddities that could probably be resolved if someone was determined to do a native look and feel, but I concede it has improved a lot - sufficiently so that it would probably be okay for Windows after all. If anything it is now the Unix port which will look odd and old-fashioned!

Jifl
--
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine



--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]