Dear Valeri Since QT exists for native MacOSX, it is surely worth trying to support the native user interface. It is neither like X11 nor like Win32. It may be worth looking at the MacOSX documentation from Apple: http://developer.apple.com/referencelibrary/MacOSX/index.html I hope this helps Best regards Christian Valeri Fine wrote: > Hello folks and Anselmo. > > I have some second (:-) thoughts. > > Can somebody who knows Mac well give us some insight? > > One has to understand > > 1. Is it worth to spend time fighting with the "native" MacOS at all. > ROOT works well under Mac with X11 interface. Is it interesting? > > 2. How MacOS with the "native" interface looks like. Is it > > 2.1. Like X11. > > In other words the system provides the dedicated concurrent "server" > process to manage the application widgets. > That is running concurrently with the end-user client application. > > 2.2. It is like Win32. > > That provides no dedicated process/thread but GDI API instead; > It is the end-user application responsibility to create such > thread on there own. > > I am wondering if Mac with the "native" interface is Win32 alike. > This means one can not apply the "X11 ROOT build". One needs to invent a dedicated > "native" ROOT Mac build "a'la ROOT Win32" one. That's some job. > > We can not use Win32 directly because it uses the specific Win32 API to create and > manage GUI thread. > I don't see we have any Qt related problem here rather "native" Mac GUI API one. > > In addition there is a "shared library build" problem. The libraries built by Qt > "auto generated makefiles" and by ROOT "Makefile" should be "compatible". This > means Qt application should be capable to load ROOT shared libs and versa verse. > It seems to me at the moment it is not a case. > > > Can someone help with expertise and time? > > Thank you. > > ---- > Best regards > Valeri > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2005 - 05:50:09 MET