reason # 42 that tk is a great toolkit. thanks hidetoshi!
On Dec 2, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Hidetoshi NAGAI wrote:
Please teach me about the features.
I want to add the features to Ruby/Tk, if I can.
--
we can deny everything, except that we have the possibility of being better. simply reflect on that.
h.h. the 14th dalai lama
From: Chad Perrin <per...@apotheon.com>
> Probably even easier to learn and implement: tk
Please teach me about the features.
I want to add the features to Ruby/Tk, if I can.
- make Tk easily available in any standard Ruby distribution:
e.g. allow to compil Ruby with Tk if the Tcl/Tk sources are in
the Ruby sources (possibly by prefixing tcl/tk generated lib for
ruby distribution)
- make Tk available to Jruby :
- either by using ffi (if i did well understood the ffi's
feature 
- or via the swank full Tk emulation in java ?
(http://kenai.com/projects/swank/pages/Home\)
Tk and Swing are two multiplateform Gui toolkit.
It would be nice if Tk could be used in the Java world, and
if Swing could (out of the Ruby box) be used from the (C)Ruby
world!
If one of the two previous universal solutions would provide,
it would help to promote the use of Ruby as standard Gui scripting
solution.
> For example, HBox/VBox(?) like widget are included
in a example 'tkalignbox.rb' on 'ext/tk/sample' directory.
-- Maurice
My mistake -- I hadn't realized Qt/Windows was available under the GPL as
of version 4.
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 05:04:41AM +0900, David Palacio wrote:
> It's also kind of onerous in terms of licensing, unless you just *really*
> like the GPL and have absolutely no interest in doing MS Windows
> development.
Why no Windows development? There is a gem for it.
--
Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ]
Quoth Edmund Burke: "Your representative owes you, not his industry
only, but his judgement; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he
sacrifices it to your opinion."
Kenneth McDonald wrote:
I've always thought Tk has been vastly underrated. It's worth it for the text and canvas widgets alone.
Agree. Every time I investigate the alternatives, tk is the quickest path to 2d animations.
--
vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
I personaly like wxRuby.
Quite easy, and lots of sample code provided with it, so really easy to
pick up.
Shoes is just fun to code, works really nicely, but I wouldn't recommand
it for normal GUI application yet, since it doesnt have menu bar for
instance.
But it's definitely worth trying 
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
you guys should really look at shoes if you want 2D!
I totally agree with you with you that tk is really underestimated,
but it always felt alien to me, because of its syntax roots in TCL which is
a very weird beast.
On the opposite, shoes totally emerge from the ruby culture, if you like
ruby, you'll like shoes.
2008/12/2 Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@path.berkeley.edu>
Kenneth McDonald wrote:
I've always thought Tk has been vastly underrated. It's worth it for the
text and canvas widgets alone.Agree. Every time I investigate the alternatives, tk is the quickest path
to 2d animations.--
vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407
Message-ID: <4935A598.3080209@path.berkeley.edu>
> I've always thought Tk has been vastly underrated. It's worth it for the
> text and canvas widgets alone.Agree. Every time I investigate the alternatives, tk is the quickest
path to 2d animations.
Does anyone want Tcl3D (http://www.tcl3d.org/\) support on Ruby/Tk ?
From: Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@path.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: best gui toolkit
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 06:11:03 +0900
--
Hidetoshi NAGAI (nagai@ai.kyutech.ac.jp)
# Does anyone want Tcl3D (http://www.tcl3d.org/) support on Ruby/Tk ?
NaHi, pls don't ask.. iow, of course! 
kind regards -botp
From: Hidetoshi NAGAI [mailto:nagai@ai.kyutech.ac.jp]
> Agree. Every time I investigate the alternatives, tk is the quickest
> path to 2d animations.Does anyone want Tcl3D (http://www.tcl3d.org/\) support on Ruby/Tk ?
that will be fantastic!
saji
--
Saji N. Hameed
APEC Climate Center +82 51 668 7470
National Pension Corporation Busan Building 12F
Yeonsan 2-dong, Yeonje-gu, BUSAN 611705 saji@apcc21.net
KOREA
you guys should really look at shoes if you want 2D!
I agree that shoes it's a very nice toy, but:
- what about if I need binding like:
<Control-x><s> on on canvas or text widget
- is there any menu bar now?
I totally agree with you with you that tk is really underestimated,
I agree too! Tk (and Tcl) has Unicode support for long time now, much
before most other script languages
The main default of Ruby with the GUI is the same default TCL has with
OO systems
The TCL argument for not having a standard OO system was that on can
use several of them... but as no one is standard, Tcl is not yet
considered as a OO langage.
Also Ruby has many (more or less easy to install) Gui toolkit
availables.
But if Ruby had (only) one full supported (preinstalled) GUI
Every one could count on any Ruby installation for building a Gui
application!
On Dec 2, 10:21 pm, Louis-Philippe <defa...@spiralix.org> wrote:
Also Ruby has many (more or less easy to install) Gui toolkit
availables.
But if Ruby had (only) one full supported (preinstalled) GUI
Every one could count on any Ruby installation for building a Gui
application!
This is along the lines of declaring a One True web framework (like Rails).
Tk and Swing are two multiplateform Gui toolkit.
It would be nice if Tk could be used in the Java world, and
if Swing could (out of the Ruby box) be used from the (C)Ruby
world!
Swing can be used out of box from JRuby, and JRuby + Swing apps don't require the user to install all of (J)Ruby, but just double click a jar/exe/app. What's the harm with JRuby, or are you referring to Ruby in a general sense?
-Logan
On Dec 3, 2008, at 3:39 AM, mdiam wrote:
Hello Logan,
> But if Ruby had (only) one full supported (preinstalled) GUI
> Every one could count on any Ruby installation for building a Gui
> application!This is along the lines of declaring a One True web framework (like
Rails).
Not exactly the same, I think (but not sure) that it's easier to
change
from a framework to another than from a (lower library like) a
GUI such Swing to Qt or Gtk.
So a GUI choice seems critical for me.
Also Tcl provide a natural GUI library with it's Tk tool kit. But
also Python which embed Tk with it!
A Python/Tk script is easiest to distribute than a Ruby/Tk (but not
as sexy to write
> It would be nice if Tk could be used in the Java world, and
> if Swing could (out of the Ruby box) be used from the (C)Ruby
> world!Swing can be used out of box from JRuby, and JRuby + Swing apps don't
require the user to install all of (J)Ruby, but just double click a
jar/exe/app.
Yes, that is **the** big advantage for JRuby (and the fact that any
java lib can be use
directly with Jruby!)
What's the harm with JRuby, or are you referring to Ruby
in a general sense?
Some of my Ruby scripts (without gui) run either in (C)Ruby or in
Jruby without
any modifications, which is very nice.
But I have some Ruby/Tk which cannot be rub into Jruby whith big
changes !
Having Tk running onto jruby (either via Swank java lib or via FFI and
native Tk) would allow me to smoothly migrate from (C)ruby to Jruby.
Or having Swing gui easily usable from native CRuby (without jni)
could be very nice too!
-- Maurice
On Dec 3, 8:18 pm, Logan Barnett <logus...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 3, 2008, at 3:39 AM, mdiam wrote: