[Mono-winforms-list] WineLib or GTK#

[Tyler W. Wilson]

Another 2 cents from me (another one that has done no coding, btw). When 
I managed programmers, I would always reprimand them for what I am about 
to discuss.


I had never tried running Wine before, so I gave it a shot. I run Gentoo 
Linux on a Thinkpad T23. Not a sluggish machine (unless I boot into XP). 
Anyway, I tried running a few applications on my Windows partition. The 
first thing that struck me was how long it took for the apps to start. 
Is this a concern to anybody? Do we want the Hello World GUI SWF 
application to start up the whole Wine machinery? Perhaps it goes faster 
if it has already been started (perhaps the Mozilla quick-start approach 
would work here).

So my cote again would be to code now with WineLib to get everything up 
and running, but during implementation think, design and code the SWF 
implementation with the idea in mind that the underlying implementation 
may be swapped at in the future. So as a previous poster said, we may 
have a SWF/Qt, SWF/Wine or SWF/Gtk.

Later,
Tyler

Matt Zyzik wrote:

>>From tallying up all of your suggestions, it appears as if most are in
>favor of implementing SWF with WineLib.
>
>I am also supporting the WineLib idea; and here are the reasons why:
>
>1. Microsoft never intended Windows.Forms to be cross-platform, which is
>why ECMA-wise, SWF is not a part of the standard.
>
>2. If people are focusing on cross-platform apps, properly coding with
>the Path class, skipping out on win32 api, not using windows registry...
>they're probably going to use a cross-platform toolkit like GTK#
>anyways.
>
>3. We want Mono to look like a solid framework; and supporting SWF 100%
>is a VERY attractive feature.
>
>4. GTK# already exists as a separate GUI and placing chunks of it into
>SWF would seem awkward.
>
>5. Implement WineLib would be a lot easier to reach a large percentage
>of compatibility; a lot of code in Wine saves us the work.
>
>6. Parts of SWF classes in mono cvs appear to already have some WineLib
>code in them.
>
>7. No concern should be attached to how everything would "look" when
>implemented with WineLib because this can always be changed and I'm sure
>the Wine people will be thinking about a native feel anyhow.
>
>8. BECAUSE I SAID SO!
>
>
>All kidding aside though, reply with some thoughts.
>
>--Matt
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mono-winforms-list maillist  -  Mono-winforms-list@lists.ximian.com
>http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-winforms-list
>  
>