On 2012-01-27 12:21, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 1/27/12, Jacob Carlborg<doob@me.com>  wrote:
>> Tango is working find with D2: https://github.com/SiegeLord/Tango-D2
>
> It wasn't the first place I went looking for an xml lib since this
> port is pretty new. But I did hear Tango's xml parser was blazing
> fast.

Most of Tango is ported. I've ported one of my projects to D2 using Tango and it's all working fine.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 18:01:48 UTC, Zachary Lund wrote:
> I do not mind using a C library in D because of how straight forward it is. But simply mentioning C++ in D seems to add unneeded complexity which should be avoided. I think the answer to a question such as "What's the alternative to Qt in D?" should not be "Qt bindings" but maybe a library which imitates the implementation and/or interface of Qt UI widgets in native D.

http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt/estimated_cost
some scary numbers

>> "What's the alternative to Qt in D?" should not be "Qt bindings" but maybe a library which imitates the implementation and/or interface of Qt UI widgets in native D.
>
> http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt/estimated_cost
> some scary numbers

http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt5

dmd could really learn a thing or two from them: http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt5/factoids/15415862 ;)

Kagamin wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 18:01:48 UTC, Zachary Lund wrote:
>> I do not mind using a C library in D because of how straight forward
>> it is. But simply mentioning C++ in D seems to add unneeded complexity
>> which should be avoided. I think the answer to a question such as
>> "What's the alternative to Qt in D?" should not be "Qt bindings" but
>> maybe a library which imitates the implementation and/or interface of
>> Qt UI widgets in native D.
>
> http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt/estimated_cost
> some scary numbers

$300K for build scripts... and Mozilla paid almost 3 million for the same.

>
> So, I would not minimize the fact to get
> stable/actively_developed/easily_maintained bindings for native
> multi-platform GUI toolkit. ;)
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Gour
>
>
>


I just wonder dwt(http://www.dsource.org/projects/dwt) is not good enough?


Regards

Marton Papp

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:14:12 +0100
equinox@atw.hu wrote:

> I just wonder dwt(http://www.dsource.org/projects/dwt) is not good
> enough?

Well, I prefer wx over SWT and besides that, Jacob said he has other & higher priorities at the moment besides working on DWT.


Sincerely,
Gour


-- 
While contemplating the objects of the senses, a person develops attachment for them, and from such attachment lust develops, and from lust anger arises.

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810

On 2012-01-28 12:47, Gour wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:14:12 +0100
> equinox@atw.hu wrote:
>
>> I just wonder dwt(http://www.dsource.org/projects/dwt) is not good
>> enough?
>
> Well, I prefer wx over SWT and besides that, Jacob said he has other
> &  higher priorities at the moment besides working on DWT.

That doesn't stop others to work on DWT :)

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 16:12:57 +0100
Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:

> That doesn't stop others to work on DWT :)

Of course, but we don't need new forces joining & forking.


Sincerely,
Gour


-- 
As fire is covered by smoke, as a mirror is covered by dust, or as the embryo is covered by the womb, the living entity is similarly covered by different degrees of this lust.

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810

On 01/28/2012 03:47 AM, Gour wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:14:12 +0100
> equinox@atw.hu wrote:
>
>> I just wonder dwt(http://www.dsource.org/projects/dwt) is not good
>> enough?
>
> Well, I prefer wx over SWT and besides that, Jacob said he has other
> &  higher priorities at the moment besides working on DWT.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Gour
>
>

DWT is not playing in the same playground (feature wise-platform wise) . So to answer your question> Yes, DWT is not good enough.

Let me quote Gour :
"
Let's not forget that today the language itself does not mean much
without 'batteries included' and the whole ecosystem inckluding
IDE/editors suppor, build systems etc.

So, I would not minimize the fact to get
stable/actively_developed/easily_maintained bindings for native
multi-platform GUI toolkit. ;)
"

I have to agree.  100 percent
Bjoern

On 01/28/2012 07:12 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> That doesn't stop others to work on DWT :)


No offense Jacob!
It is just that imo wxWidgets  is the most flexible gui toolkiy in town. and reading what is planned for 3.0     yum   iOS.. maybe Android    But despite that, DWT requires Java like programming in D (well, a matter of taste) . But also , NO dockable planes receptive, windows... week grid support, etc.. and so on, and so on. NO we need a full blown GUI and wxWidgets is,at least, a very good one.

a+
bjoern