thomas at gstaedtner.net
Sun Apr 19 23:14:44 CEST 2009
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Carsten Haitzler <raster at rasterman.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 19:31:39 -0700 Ali <alishams at interchange.ubc.ca> said:
>> On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 11:28 +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
>> > so what other choices do you have if you have eliminated qt for license
>> > reasons and you think gtk is just not up to snuff and is unlikely to get
>> > there easily without major breaks?
>> I've been a fan of fltk for a little while now (have only written the
>> most basic things with it and that was 3-4 years ago), what are your
>> opinions of it in regards to the neo? It's very fast and light, I think
>> Dillo is written in fltk and it's lightning fast with a small footprint.
>> What do you guys think about a stack (on top of debian for convenience)
>> that uses flwm and everything else in fltk?
> isn't fltk just a wrapper around gtk?
No, it really is a completely independent toolkit and really lightweight.
However, this doesn't make it a good choice if you can avoid it.
Sure, if you have 16 MB Ram and 8 MB Rom as only storage it is pretty neat.
However, we don't have that limitations, so all the disadvantages hit
without bringing any advantages at all (nobody would think of an
FLTK-only toolkit in an environment with 128 MB Ram).
Raster, you wouldn't use it anyway, because it's written in C++ and as
far as I know there are no C bindings :)
More information about the community