From: Kevin Smith <kevinbsmith@...>
Date: 2001-11-17T10:30:37+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:25691] Re: What happened to Ruby-Fltk?

--- Kent Dahl <kentda@stud.ntnu.no> wrote:
> It still appears at:
> 	http://kt-www.jaist.ac.jp/~ttate/ruby/ruby-fltk.html
> but it does smell a wee bit stale, which is a shame...

It hasn't been updated for a couple months, but I think
that's mostly due to a lack of feedback from people using
it. It works well enough for my own personal projects right
now, so I haven't felt compelled to make changes. 

If someone asks for enhancements, I'll probably work on it
again. Otherwise, it has to compete with other projects for
my time (and the time of the primary Ruby/FLTK developer).
 
> Anyone know if FLTK lends itself nicely to being SWIG'ed
> to Ruby?

I haven't used SWIG, but my feeling when I started working
on Ruby/FLTK was that it wouldn't be a great fit. Partly
because the SWIG documents really seemed to say that it
wasn't well suited for C++ (perhaps that's a
misinterpretation on my part), and partly because the class
API's really need to be sculpted to be more Ruby-like, and
I'm not sure how well SWIG does with that.

Is there a reason to SWIG it? Do you think there would be
advantages over the current approach?

Kevin


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com