From: Holden Glova <dsafari@...>
Date: 2003-01-11T11:13:47+09:00
Subject: Re: Why Fox

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:16, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> Could someone explain to me why Ruby is adopting Fox as its standard GUI?
>
> I'm not bashing Fox, this is an honest question.  Fox is not the standard
> GUI of any OS.  My experience indicates that it's difficult to install
> under Unix/Linux.  Because it's not based on the native GUI it always
> looks out of place (IMHO) and (for the same reason) it's slow (at least in
> my limited experience).
>
> I'm sure that there is a very good reason for choosing Fox.  I just want
> to know what it is.
>
> Thanks a lot.

Hi Daniel,

I don't have all the answers to your questions but maybe a few opinions and 
experiences to share.

Fox is a stable gui toolkit and FXRuby is probably the most actively 
maintained set of Ruby GUI bindings available due to much hardwork by Lyle 
Johnson. There has been many, many, a GUI thread on -talk (check the archives 
if interested). Some talk about an SWT like toolkit that binds to native 
widgets for the OS so users can experience the look and feel they are used 
to. The real goal needs to be defined before answering this question 
properly. Maybe the goal is to have a set of actively maintained GUI bindings 
to a stable GUI toolkit? If that is the goal FOX certainly meets those needs 
IMHO.

I have not had any trouble at all building and installing Fox or FXRuby. I 
also have not noticed any performance issues. Installing FOX was easy on 
Debian, Gentoo and from source without the use of the previously mentioned 
distributions package managers.

- -- 
Signed,
Holden Glova
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+H34K0X8w8X71zPcRAnVcAJ911WQvx5PBnjOoJATalupYsxd2AwCeMV9G
04HTYYYaPVVMWQo4VpB8iZo=
=zJaK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----