Not impossible.  Look at PerlNET for example.

"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:btulkc$1ut1$1@digitaldaemon.com...

> I wouldn't like this very much. Wrapping them or what ever or a way to
access
> the .NET framework (which seems to be impossible if D doesn't become a
language
> that is compiled to MSIL) would be what I'd like to see.

Ok, Done.

It's on my Page now. http://davepermen.net

The direct Link is: http://davepermen.homeip.net/Shared/freeImage.exe

an example using it can follow.
(i've combined it with dig, to have there bitmaps loaded of all supported
freeImage types.. quite fun short piece of code, hehe)

I'd be happy to see more of the addon libs directly installable into the etc folder, and collect them. my server is just too slow for it. 100kbits upload.. urgh:D will be 200 soon, but still.

In article <bu2q55$2qhb$1@digitaldaemon.com>, davepermen says...
>
>In article <bu1dbq$ebg$1@digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
>>
>>Cool can you send me the freeimage package ?  I use that for C++ also.
>>
>>C
>>
>
>
>Once I get home, I can share it. It's selfinstalling into the C:\ path, containing
>
>etc.c.FreeImage        // the converted original header \dmd\lib\FreeImage.lib // the converted original lib \dmd\lib\freeImage.dll // somewhere we should store it :D
>
>and
>
>etc.freeImage          // a small D class and some functions \dmd\lib\freeImage.obj // the compiled version of it
>
>usage:
>
>import etc.freeImage;
>// import etc.c.FreeImage; // if you need to
>
>Image image = loadImage("stone.jpg");
>or, in my case, i often need it as 32bit rgba =>
>Image image = loadImage("stone.jpg").to32Bits();
>
>and, for example in opengl:
>
>glTexImage2D(
>GL_TEXTURE_2D,
>0,
>GL_RGBA8,
>image.width,
>image.height,
>0,
>GL_RGBA,
>GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE,
>image.data
>);
>
>
>As i said: Once I'm at home.
>
>
>I'm really interested in setting up a common source-share. An online etc where everyone can contribute. That way, we would quickly be able to addopt a lot of stuff.
>
>Direct Ports of c libraries get plugged into etc.c.*, rewritten D style libraries for easy use in a modern way gets plugged into etc.*
>
>I'd rewrite sdl and opengl to fit into that sheme, as well as I could finalize the FreeImage port.
>
>Of course, there could be tons of stuff ported. But that way, nobody ports twice.
>
>

In article <bu24j2$1m5l$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Achilleas Margaritis says... ..
>The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first class library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary concerns.
..
>Finally, I was reading an interview with Stroustrup, where he said that C++ did not have a standard GUI library, because of two reasons:
..
>The above can be translated (by reading between the lines) as "I wish there was a standard GUI for C++, but, as the situation is right now, it will never be".

While I personally couldn't care less about the GUI, it does have an enormous
impact on the street. (You have to remember that for every programmer there
are 10 jerks pretending to be the Resident Know-it-all, and these people
want to make a big splash with very little programming. (Deplorable, I
know.) But each of these has an Uncle-in-law who is a corporate big shot.
Ahd those are the guys making the Real Decisions.) Being able to write
easy programs that loog good, just is a prerequisite to making any serious
inroads to the crystallised VB community.

Borland made a splash with Turbo Vision (a character based GUI for console
programming, both Pascal and C++). This gave extra years and industry
usage to Pascal, beyond their own expectations. Later they made The GUI
for Pascal, (and mostly for marketing reasons) changed the name to
Delphi, as if there were a new language to go with the GUI. This has had
an enormous success. I dare say, if it hadn't been for Java, (and the
$M put to its marketing) then Delphi would rule head to head with VB today.

So, access to effortless GUI programming does make a difference for a language.

One does not have to have a GUI (let alone an operating system specific one) _in_ the language, or even in the Standard Library. But what we have to make sure is _easy access_ and _common knowledge where to get it_!!

The main thing is that people actually do start using one. The less hours people use fighting with GUI trivialities, or operating system idiosyncracies, the more time they can use to produce splashy, or useful, or even controversial applications in D.

It's like the old economist puzzle: give $100 000 each to 5 guys to invest for 5 years. The first year one of them does 25% better than the others. Now, how much do the others have to improve if he goes on with that same absolute return rate?

Answer: no matter how much they cheat, how many they murder, they'll never catch up, in the real world.

So, we better get those 25% more users _this year_. If it's not the GUI programming, it'll have to be something else real sexy.

Walter wrote:
> 
> What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch,
> instead take the best one out there and port it to D.
> 
> 
Any suggestions as for which GUI library is the best one?  wxWindows?

Matthew wrote:
> What's happened to that? It's taken nearly as long as The D Journal to get
> going.
> 
> Benji, take one step forward. We need you. :)
> 
Yeah, I was really excited when he announced his plans for a repository.
http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/15099

I think his last message was December 3, 2003:
http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/19803

I think he got caught up with real life.  A pity.  It sounded like he had a great plan.  I hope he's doing ok.

-- 
Justin
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

"Paul Runde" <prunde@consolidated.net> wrote in message news:bu4lvc$2qo1$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Walter wrote:
> >
> > What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch, instead take the best one out there and port it to D.
> >
> >
> Any suggestions as for which GUI library is the best one?  wxWindows?

wxWindows is certainly a contender.

Well said!

I know its not sexy yet ( soon! ) , but there is Windy (
www.atari-soldiers.com/windy.html ).  An effortless GUI is helped alot by
the language i think , and D definetly has that going for it.

C

"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bu4lgt$2q17$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> In article <bu24j2$1m5l$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Achilleas Margaritis says... ..
> >The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first
class
> >library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary concerns.
> ..
> >Finally, I was reading an interview with Stroustrup, where he said that
C++
> >did not have a standard GUI library, because of two reasons:
> ..
> >The above can be translated (by reading between the lines) as "I wish
there
> >was a standard GUI for C++, but, as the situation is right now, it will never be".
>
> While I personally couldn't care less about the GUI, it does have an
enormous
> impact on the street. (You have to remember that for every programmer
there
> are 10 jerks pretending to be the Resident Know-it-all, and these people want to make a big splash with very little programming. (Deplorable, I know.) But each of these has an Uncle-in-law who is a corporate big shot. Ahd those are the guys making the Real Decisions.) Being able to write easy programs that loog good, just is a prerequisite to making any serious inroads to the crystallised VB community.
>
> Borland made a splash with Turbo Vision (a character based GUI for console
> programming, both Pascal and C++). This gave extra years and industry
> usage to Pascal, beyond their own expectations. Later they made The GUI
> for Pascal, (and mostly for marketing reasons) changed the name to
> Delphi, as if there were a new language to go with the GUI. This has had
> an enormous success. I dare say, if it hadn't been for Java, (and the
> $M put to its marketing) then Delphi would rule head to head with VB
today.
>
> So, access to effortless GUI programming does make a difference for a language.
>
> One does not have to have a GUI (let alone an operating system specific one) _in_ the language, or even in the Standard Library. But what we have to make sure is _easy access_ and _common knowledge where to get it_!!
>
> The main thing is that people actually do start using one. The less hours people use fighting with GUI trivialities, or operating system idiosyncracies, the more time they can use to produce splashy, or useful, or even controversial applications in D.
>
> It's like the old economist puzzle: give $100 000 each to 5 guys to invest for 5 years. The first year one of them does 25% better than the others. Now, how much do the others have to improve if he goes on with that same absolute return rate?
>
> Answer: no matter how much they cheat, how many they murder, they'll never catch up, in the real world.
>
> So, we better get those 25% more users _this year_. If it's not the GUI programming, it'll have to be something else real sexy.
>
>
>

C wrote:

> Well said!
> 
> I know its not sexy yet ( soon! ) , but there is Windy (
> www.atari-soldiers.com/windy.html ).  An effortless GUI is helped alot by
> the language i think , and D definetly has that going for it.
> 
> C

A tiny word of advice on that.  The main reason I haven't done much fiddling with windy at the moment is because it's large enough that understanding the design is nontrivial.  Profuse documentation (both the interface, and the implementation) would probably go a long way towards encouraging folks to try and use/improve it.

Additionally, you may want to get a hold of the author of DUI.  If windy and DUI just so happened to have identical interfaces, then D would suddenly have something quite similar to IBM's SWT.  (SWT is the GUI toolkit used in Eclipse.  It's basically reimplemented for every platform for maximum speed and native-look-and-feel-ism)

 -- andy

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:30:43 -0800, Andy Friesen wrote:

> 
> Additionally, you may want to get a hold of the author of DUI.  If windy and DUI just so happened to have identical interfaces, then D would suddenly have something quite similar to IBM's SWT.  (SWT is the GUI toolkit used in Eclipse.  It's basically reimplemented for every platform for maximum speed and native-look-and-feel-ism)
> 

DUI is just a thin layer over GTK.
it's GTK calls wrapped 1 to 1 on D objects
using D arrays instead of GTK GList and
defining an OO interface to callbacks
(the listeners you guys don't like).
Nothing more than that (oh, and a few of
simplifications on the API)

I started DUI because I tought I could get it
with a reasonable low amount of efford.

We could start by trying something like AWT:
create a common interface for what exist
on both platforms.
but I'm not put any hours on that.
DUI is already available for windows - even if alpha
with some important widgets missing (ie ComboBox)

Ant

DUI - D graphical Use Interface
http://dui.sourceforge.net

"C" <dont@respond.com> wrote in message news:bu2d7k$24lt$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> This is the best argument for Java I've heard yet , cost.  And
unfortunately
> in the end , alot of times thats what it comes down to ( especially with
the
> government ;) )
>
> C

With the government thats the only thing it ever comes down to.