[Mono-list] Fwd: Possible replacement for Windows.Forms

[Joe Tennies]

This is obviously a problem too, but the other option is to create yet
another library to dynamically link to.  Not to mention requiring a C++
compiler as well.  I know Miguel tends to be concerned about such
things.  Though I am not sure Ximian would officially support such a
thing... or even make use of it.  I think that a major supporter would
be nice.

On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 00:23, murban wrote:
> What proportion of the code for the reimplemented WxWindows would be unique to 
> each toolkit (e.g. MS Windows, GTK+, Xlib, Motif, Carbon)?
> 
> My concern would be that instead of creating two libraries, one that maps C# 
> to C another layer that maps C to C++, you're going to have a C# to C library 
> for MS Windows, another for GTK+, another for Xlib, etc.
> 
> On Tuesday 16 July 2002 11:12 pm, you wrote:
> > This is why I think reimplementing wxWindows would be better.  It would
> > also not add additional requirements.  It would compile against
> > something the user should have (GTK+, Xlib, Motif, Aqua, Carbon, etc.)
> > Of course, this runs into the problem of having to maintain the code
> > changes wxWindows has.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>