One feature I'd like to see mention is the ability for the UI toolkit
library to be embedded in binary distribution, like rubyscript2exe and a
few others do. I know wxruby plays well with rubyscript2exe but not Tk,
and for me that rules Tk out. I don't know about the other and it would
be nice to know.
FXRuby also plays *very* well with rubyscript2exe.
Jamey Cribbs
Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email and any materials contained in any attachments is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, or are not the intended recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender by email and destroy all copies of the original message, including attachments.
Feel free to update that as applicable. No matter what happens to the
actual packages, there's a number of pieces of the RPA infrastructure
that can still be a boon to Ruby if people help keep them up to date.
Eivind.
···
On 10/4/05, Eustaquio Rangel de Oliveira J <eustaquiorangel@yahoo.com> wrote:
--- Robert Klemme <bob.news@gmx.net> wrote:
> Is it possible to add a table with feature vs. UI
> toolkit so people can
> quickly check them against each other?
--- Jeff Hobbs <jeffh@removethis.activestate.com>
wrote:
Eustaquio Rangel de Oliveira J wrote:
Tk is only ugly if that's the way you like it. You have a
full set of themed widgets available now that give you
native look and feel, with all the same dynamic control and
general ease of use that Tk has always provided. All this
on Aqua, Win32 and X11 (even Windows/CE). Some screenshots
of Tk apps that try not to be ugly:
Oh boy, was me that did not checked all its features
or Tk has evolved a lot on the last years? Will take a
look on all that stuff.
Thanks a lot for the links, Jeff. I hope you didn't
get the "ugly" thing as an insult.
No insult taken. Tk certainly keeps moving, but it's done in
a low-key manner. There have always been many extensions to
Tk that provide a wealth of extra functionality. User demand
for the native widget extension (tile) has triggered its
inclusion for Tk 8.5 (still in development). Looking at the
Ruby/Tk sources, there appears to be support for tile in there
already (based on the Tk 8.4 stuff).
The classic Tk widgets do have a dated look, but even that is
easily modified with a few lines of code and the 'option'
command. For true native look and feel though, you really
need to rearchitect the widgets (as tile/ttk does). For
example, most tile widgets don't have a -background option -
that is something that the theme controls (and when you are on
something like OS X, may not be a simple color at all).
Anyways, Tk may still not be the ideal toolkit for your needs,
but "because it's ugly" is no longer a valid reason.
Neither FxRuby or WxRuby seem to play very well on Tiger,for me. Maybe
I'll try Qt/Ruby, although their license for windows used to be not to
my tastes.
Jamey Cribbs wrote:
···
Guillaume Marcais wrote:
>One feature I'd like to see mention is the ability for the UI toolkit
>library to be embedded in binary distribution, like rubyscript2exe and a
>few others do. I know wxruby plays well with rubyscript2exe but not Tk,
>and for me that rules Tk out. I don't know about the other and it would
>be nice to know.
>
>
FXRuby also plays *very* well with rubyscript2exe.
Jamey Cribbs
Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email and any materials contained in any attachments is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, or are not the intended recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender by email and destroy all copies of the original message, including attachments.
I haven't seen any mention of Rails in this discussion. It seems
to me that RubyCocoa, Ruby/Tk, and other GUI APIs might benefit
from being set up as Rails "views".
On 10/4/05, vapidbabble@gmail.com <vapidbabble@gmail.com> wrote:
Neither FxRuby or WxRuby seem to play very well on Tiger,for me. Maybe
I'll try Qt/Ruby, although their license for windows used to be not to
my tastes.
Yes it does. It's very slick. But not exactly cross-platform ;). My
preference is wxRuby, I'm a Python traitor and used wxPython, wxWindows
before. I'll probably sub on the list for wxRuby[1], and try
darwinports (seems slow on some apps but nice selection of ruby stuff
not on gems) or compile the source (seems fast on my new mac-Mini for
what I compiled and didn't have a *.dmg).[2]
···
--
john
[1] The wxRuby Dmg seemed a bit funky in install.
[2] Linux traitor as well. 'doze still pays the bills
