It appears that C# has the same problem as D with regards to libraries written in C++. There are 3 different gui toolkits that the C# community is writing C interfaces for: FOX, wxWidgets(wxWindows), and QT.
Why not let them do that then use their work(Fox and wxWidgets are being done as free software, dont know about QT).

Robert Jones wrote:

> It appears that C# has the same problem as D with regards to libraries written in C++. There are 3 different gui toolkits that the C# community is writing C interfaces for: FOX, wxWidgets(wxWindows), and QT.
> Why not let them do that then use their work(Fox and wxWidgets are being done as free software, dont know about QT).

The problem is that C# has no trouble at all connecting to C++ (via the managed extensions), while D cannot do so directly at all.

Also, you forgot about GTK#. :)

 -- andy

"Andy Friesen" <andy@ikagames.com> wrote in message news:c39nd3$1uqk$2@digitaldaemon.com...
> Robert Jones wrote:
>
> > It appears that C# has the same problem as D with regards to libraries
> > written in C++. There are 3 different gui toolkits that the C# community
> > is writing C interfaces for: FOX, wxWidgets(wxWindows), and QT.
> > Why not let them do that then use their work(Fox and wxWidgets are being
> > done as free software, dont know about QT).
>
> The problem is that C# has no trouble at all connecting to C++ (via the managed extensions), while D cannot do so directly at all.

That's not entirely true, but it's certainly true in the majority of cases, and of significant practical use.