Dejan Lekic wrote:
> 
>> Its lot of work and you would have to keep track of all changes to the 2.0 (C++) tree.
> That is not a problem because I do those C++ changes in FLTK2 tree as well (as said earlier, I am one of people who work on the FLTK project).
> 
> Speaking of messy FLTK code... I have seen much more messy code in some more popular GUI toolkits, I do not want to name them here because I have some respect for what they did.

I will!  wxWidgets wxWidgets wxWidgets!
Still a great piece of software, but it has definitely accumulated a lot of crazy crufty incomprehensible code over the years.

> At the end, I know couple of very bright people from D community who use FLTK, and I expect their help with this.

My gripes with FLTK were always 1) ugly and 2) callbacks suck in C++.  I think 1) is addressed by FLTK2 with theming support and hopefully 2) will be addressed by using something like std.signal in the D port.

--bb

Dejan Lekic wrote:

> That is not a problem because I do those C++ changes in FLTK2 tree as well (as said earlier, I am one of people who work on the FLTK project).

Yes I know, I have been following fltk list for years.

> 
> Speaking of messy FLTK code... I have seen much more messy code in some more popular GUI toolkits, I do not want to name them here because I have some respect for what they did.

I have never used FLTK2 so I cant do any comments about it.
A couple of issues I have with FLTK1 is that I have found class code splitted into more then one file. And the box drawing styles for example, some are enums and some are functions. And there are more. So there are some strange code in there.

And I really really dont like how the code is formatted. But this is a personal issue I have and as such quite meaningless to discuss.

But it is small, portable, stable and fast, and that I do like :)

Micke wrote:
> fltk4d is a wrapper for the FLTK gui library.
> http://dronten.googlepages.com/fltk4d

Nice!!

Any /actual/ user experiences?
Preferably from "unrelated users"? Anybody?

Like, was it easy to "get running", was it easy to try it out with your own test case, would you recommend it to others (and if so, for tinkering or for serious corporate programming, as in skipping Java or .NET)?

The FLTK pages on Lua are awesome, and give an impression of trivially easy usage and next to none overhead (as measured in programmer hours wasted both to the learning curve and at actual work). How does this compare to them?

---

Why am I asking? Well, recently I sold the possibly first serious factory automation solution in D, and now I have been approached by a party who want me to make a similar GUI app, but more complex.

I'd love to do it in D, but seeing this is a long-term project with a (well)paying customer with long-term commitment in mind, I'm hard put to not recommend me doing it in Delphi. (Comprehensive GUI library (actually multi platform), RAD tools, long-term (historically proven!!) commitment from the language vendor, obvious commitment to backwards compatibility in new versions, amazing productivity with their source editor, advanced debugging, two-way UML support, unit testing, and last but not least: serious and long term commitment to programmers who've invested in learning Their Way. In other words, (as opposed to Windows or C(++), you don't have to forget half of what you know at each major release) respect for the customer.

Sure, I could test fltk4d right now, (and all the other alternatives too) for a coulpe of weeks each, but I'm on a tight schedule here for the answer, and I trust other folks may have better insight than I could gather in the given time.  :-(

---

PS, /technically/ this is the wrong forum for this kind of questions. My appologies. OTOH, serious answers to this post would be more in the spirit of this NG than d.D (or d.D.learn).