On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Carsten Mattner <carstenmattner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Chris Moller <moller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> My point in my original post was that a toolkit should, above all, be >> useful, preferably in as wide a range of uses as possible. And, by that >> measure, GTK2 was a great deal more useful, at least in certain >> environments, than GTK3. Not every app needs the stylistic consistency >> offered by a fairly complex CSS paradigm. The code I write is primarily in >> aid of technical visualisation involving cairographics in a drawing area, >> OpenGL, and so on, and usually involves a complex UI containing lots and >> lots of spinbutton widgets and similar controls. Screen space is a premium, >> a pretty UI is not, and there some things that, so far as I've been able to >> discover, you just can't do with the GTK3 CSS mechanism that are trivial to >> do under GTK2. > > If you fail to bend GTK to your will and Qt also doesn't fit, I think FLTK > is used in the domain you describe. Not sure about Fox but FLTK is > used for applications like that. In case you start looking for alternatives. I've sent you other options to consider, but if anyone at some point considers the use of more declarative toolkit, I can recommend spending an afternoon going through the Red (Rebol descendant) examples. It doesn't target X11 or Wayland yet, and is in its infancy, but it goes to show how a radically different language can make building graphical applications a much more productive experience. _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
