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

[Achim Schneider]

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.