[ruby-talk:7606] Re: A Java Developer's Wish List for Ruby

On Mon, 18 Dec 2000, you wrote:
> 
> From my perspective, I think FOX is worth considering because:
> 
> 1. It looks better than GTK, particularly to Windows users.
> 
> 2. Its Windows development is part of the main process, rather than a 
>    bolt-on project.
> 

There are current issues with gtk+ and Windows; the promise of having this
resolved in the future is simply that, a promise, and _not_ a reality.
That said, the little bit of experimentation I have been doing with RubyGTK
leads me to like it, but for Linux boxes only.

The Tk widget set, while truly cross-platform has some issues, as well.  Native
support for gif only and not jpg or png is a problem (although these are
available in add-on libraries).  There is a concern, of course, regarding
Aruba, but I think that is being handled by the Tcl community and should not
really be an issue.  Regarding the "perceptivity" of Tk cross-platform, I think
it has the same issues as gtk+.

FOX does seem very nice on initial review.  The bundled image viewer compiled
w/o a problem and it seems to load gif, jpg or png files and also saves png
files (didn't try the others) so that is very good news.  The png's also seem
to load and sae with transparancy preserved, so _that_ is very, _very_ good
news! :-)

Only downside I can see at the moment to FOX as the GUI of choice for Ruby is
current lack of Mac support (and I don't mean for OS X only).  While both Mac
and Linux users are way down the list relative to Windows in terms of market
share, they are still a significant factor in many specialized areas.  Linux
market share is growing, but Mac users tend to be fiercely loyal (and vocal)
and represent a strong niche market which, I believe, Ruby developers should be
able to address along with the others.  Just my thoughts on cross-platform :-)

NOw, if I read the previous posts correctly,  wasn't it FOX that was
considering Mac support if they only had a testbed? If so, perhaps there is a
Ruby/Mac user on this list with the time to become a member of the FOX
development team and thus (in a roundabout sort of way) make this happen? 

> 
> Let's assume Ruby thrives, and that FOX becomes the GUI of choice for a 
> new generation of Ruby developers. Should external support for FOX
> start to dry up, I'm guessing that folks in the Ruby community will
> step in and help.
> 

That seems to be what is happening in the tcl/Tk community.  One of the
benefits of open source is that the parent _can_ die, but the children live on
to grow and thrive,  

<soapbox>
Open source really has a kind of connection to human
biological imperitives that proprietary models lack. 
</soapbox>

> I think there is no clear winner in all this process, but GTK makes me
> slightly nervous, and I'd like to see what a FOX-based interface
> looked like (both visually and in code) before making my mind which
> library I personally will be using.
> 
> And I think that's an important point. We're not deciding here which
> library developers must use. We're simply debating the pros and cons
> of individual libraries. Eventually, the conclusions we reach may
> affect which libraries get included in various distributions, but
> we're not doing anything that prevents a team from using any GUI
> library they want.
> 

Well, we definitely want to give the developer as many choices as possible. 
Soem gui's do some jobs better than others.  Final decisions are based upon
nature and target audience of the project, distribution specifics and so foth. 
Type and depth of widget sets would enter into the developer's decision, along
with, possibly, the ease of rolling your own. But that is a developer issue.  I
belive that when the fundamentals of a language are being formulated, the
responsible path is to provide as much breadth and depth of choice for the
users of that language as is possible. (Did i forget the "soapbox" tags there?)

Kent Starr
[e-mail]