RE: Gtk ?

Hello Daniele,

>
> > > i'll be glad to help testing and coding.
> >
> >
> > Can you elaborate a little bit? Did your statement suggest you have some
> > "free" manpower just for Gtk? or for the robust flexible, powerful,
> cross
> > platform etc, etc, etc . . . Root Gui?-)
>
> I don't have so much spare time, i can invest some of it in something
> usefull to my and my work. I don't know if ROOT will be part of my work
> but GTK is and so i'm happy to spend some time improving my knoweldge of
> GTK. It's also true that in a way or in another i make some patch to any
> software i work with...

[Valeri Fine]

  Thank you very much for your clarification. In fact your point is closed to that it is behind of QT/Root layer.
 I think there are two scenarios (use cases) those are be feasible to implement and useful at the same time.

1. Enhance ROOT applications with the GDk GUI components
2. Populate the GDK-based application with the "embedded" TCanvas.

The Qt-layer demonstrates how to do that. What essentially should be done is to implementation of the TVirtualX via GDK. In fact, this is what WIN32GDK had done. This means what you should do is to try that win32gdk on UNIX platform. Sounds simple :-)

The only problem is the ROOT interfaces are the moving targets. By the time one can roll out some new implementation of the some interface the later very likely will be significantly changed (or removed from the system) :-( So, one has to learn the code from the HEAD CVS and work very quickly.

On the other hands, one can adopt Go4 approach. I can not say which one is simpler to implement, each has its own pro and cons.

             Best regards, Valeri

>
> Ciao
> --
> Daniele
>
> Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but
> that's not why we do it. -- Richard P. Feynman
Received on Thu Mar 24 2005 - 02:50:00 MET