From: itsme213 Date: 2004-12-15T03:47:18+09:00 Subject: Re: wxRuby and other GUI toolkits Any chance you could provide a simplified interface along the lines discussed at length in http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/messages/36fe4224ced792ff,7824fe1d05b4f648,ffa0c9b33be25877,453e05fefa6610b4,79dd1925715e2b10,3c7c01a279f685f6,fc636d28f68f9266,78ac98a3c718caa4,4f3960a377f7eed1,99bd3fcd397cf7d1?thread_id=b901e483a6711f72&mode=thread&noheader=1&q=UI+hal+fulton#doc_36fe4224ced792ff It basically let's Ruby code look structurally like the ui structure, and uses some variation of dynamic binding to more cleanly define, override, and lookup wide-ranging defaults. I for one would gravitate strongly towards such a simplified interface ... "Nick" wrote in message news:41BEFE07.5080304@nicreations.com... > > So, having subscribed recently to the ruby-talk mailing list, I've > noticed that wxruby doesn't seem to have the "respect" of other GUI > libraries. I know GUI-library preference is a holy war almost up there > with vi versus emacs, but since I'm a wxruby developer, I'd like to know > what people "don't" like about wxruby. Otherwise, how else do we improve? > > Browsing online, I've found a few complaints: > > Difficulty in getting it installed - Daniel Sheppard, > http://www.jroller.com/page/soxbox/ > Use of ugly integer values for event handlers - > http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~naseby/31.html > > It's a good start (though I don't know what platform Mr. Sheppard is > trying to install on), but any other discussion would be most helpful. > > Thanks, > > Nick > >