[Haskell-cafe] Re: Why binding to existing widget toolkits doesn't make any sense

Achim Schneider barsoap at web.de
Wed Jan 28 16:01:15 EST 2009

John Lato <jwlato at gmail.com> wrote:

> Achim Schneider wrote:
> >
> > So what's left of those TK's if we don't use their abstractions and
> > replace them with Haskell? Drawing and layouting, that's what's
> > left[3]. Both, IMNSHO, do not justify carrying around bloaty
> > external dependencies, they're too trivial. They certainly don't
> > justify using unsafePerformIO to hide foreign side effects and the
> > headaches associated with it.
> >
> >
> > So, if you don't mind, I'm going to stop trying to fit cubes into
> > round holes and gonna use reactive and fieldtrip[4] to do things.
> >
> Does this mean you're volunteering to create a fieldtrip-based toolkit
> with widgets and layout?
Most likely, no. fieldtrip uses glut, which only supports one os-level
window and is therefore borked for a considerable amount of stuff one
wants a TK be able to do. It (currently) also doesn't support
orthographic projection, which you need to properly position 2d. In
the end, it's a small and great library for stuff you don't need for
a TK, and is thus quite unsuited as a platform for one. Fieldtrip
widgets are another thing, of course.

I'm not volunteering for anything. I'm just hacking away on stuff and
following some inspiration I had while I implemented a simplistic
widget UI under J2ME, limited to what the game needed.

(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers
for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting,
performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited.

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list