Bjoern schrieb:
> Does it make sense, to port the SWT snippets ?
> this ones : http://www.eclipse.org/swt/snippets/

Sure, that would be great.
I you want to start, please talk to me first.
So I can prepare the sources in the same way, i did it on the rest.

As said in the dwt-linux homepage, in the moment i am working on the examples.
this ones: http://www.eclipse.org/swt/examples.php

Frank

Frank Benoit wrote:
> Bjoern schrieb:
>> Does it make sense, to port the SWT snippets ?
>> this ones : http://www.eclipse.org/swt/snippets/
> 
> Sure, that would be great.
> I you want to start, please talk to me first.
> So I can prepare the sources in the same way, i did it on the rest.
> 
> As said in the dwt-linux homepage, in the moment i am working on the examples.
> this ones: http://www.eclipse.org/swt/examples.php
> 
> Frank

This is great news and I would be happy to help. I can help testing both the linux and windows version. Any plans on an osx version?

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Depending on how threads are used, you may be lucky. The latest has
> std.thread wrapping tango.core.Thread and simple examples work correctly.
> There are a few methods in std.thread that had to be set to no-ops though.
> 

I've already verified that DWT wouldn't work, it uses Thread.getThis quite a bit.  So I'll just use tango threads directly when linking with dwt-linux, otherwise phobos threads.

Frank Benoit wrote:
> Dear D community
> 
> We are happy to announce the new dsource projects
> - DWT-Win      http://www.dsource.org/projects/dwt-win
> - DWT-Linux    http://www.dsource.org/projects/dwt-linux

A while ago, someone mentioned that he might get his company to port SWT to D.  Do you know what happened to that?  I guess it didn't happen, or you wouldn't be starting this project.

torhu schrieb:
> A while ago, someone mentioned that he might get his company to port SWT to D.  Do you know what happened to that?  I guess it didn't happen, or you wouldn't be starting this project.

I wrote an email to robby, and also asked in his ng thread ("A couple of thoughts/queries." 8th dec 07) if he received it, but i never got any response.

doob schrieb:
> This is great news and I would be happy to help. I can help testing both the linux and windows version. Any plans on an osx version?

No plans for OSX for now. Doing this means to do the whole port again, because OSX will use the native widget from OSX and so its implementation is very different from the gtk/win.

But, if you want to start this, you are welcome. I can assist with some swt specific knowledge and experience how to do the porting efficient.

Manual port?! You guys must be really determined :)

Maybe you can make the GTK port available to Windows too? It won't be that native but I think it is not a big deal, plus it supports theming which could be useful.

bobef schrieb:
> Maybe you can make the GTK port available to Windows too? It won't be that native but I think it is not a big deal, plus it supports theming which could be useful.
If you have experience with GTK and windows, would you mind to take a look? Perhaps it is quite easy to do that, perhaps not.

bobef wrote:

> Manual port?! You guys must be really determined :)
> 
> Maybe you can make the GTK port available to Windows too? It won't be that native but I think it is not a big deal, plus it supports theming which could be useful.

I thought about this possibility. It could work with some effort, I suppose...but it would take reprogramming certain sections that depend on non-windows features (X11, XRender, etc) and also working without direct COM which the win32 SWT uses. It also would add dependencies like the gtk+ toolkit dll's and gthreads (and all the dll's they depend on), which would meen added bloat.  The linux version of dwt also uses many gtk/gdk functions that are linux/X11 specific also (I think).  In short, the win32 SWT seems quite closely connected to win32 (which is good for optimal performance and interface consistancy).

So, I think it wouldn't be that easy.  But, by all means, please prove me wrong if you like. :) Can't hurt having a third port, although I'd be honored to have you lend your skills to the win32 port first.  If I remember correctly, your skills are quite extroadinary in that area.

In summary, T\the advantage of doing a direct win port is probably less bloat, more consistancy with platform, and being able to reference the original 3.03 version of DWT as a guideline. I also think you will find fewer people interested in a win32 gtk+ based version.  For others, it's no big deal.

-JJR

bobef wrote:

> Manual port?! You guys must be really determined :)
> 
> Maybe you can make the GTK port available to Windows too? It won't be that native but I think it is not a big deal, plus it supports theming which could be useful.


Oh... and about theming... I'm not exactly familiar with how swt does it, but both win32 and linux swt seem to support their own theming mechanism. I'm not sure how it works, but it's in swt/internal/theme. Of course, win32 version uses win32 system calls and linux uses gtk+ calls.

-JJR