[lazarus] Progress

[Shane Miller]

Actuallly, users WILL be able to create their own widgets once we add some
drawing mechanism that they can use to draw their widget.  They COULD write
the entire thing in Pascal if they wished, just like you add something
totally new in windows.  If there isn't something that looks like you need,
then you need to draw it.  The drawing interface will need to be done before
this is possible.

------------------------------------------------------------
Shane Miller

Home page : http://www.lakefield.net/~smiller

Auto-IP Publisher : http://www.lakefield.net/~smiller/autoip

Advanced Clipboard : http://www.lakefield.net/~smiller/advclipboard

Lazarus : http://www.miraclec.com/lazarus
----------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey A. Wormsley <daworm at cdc.net>
To: lazarus at miraclec.com <lazarus at miraclec.com>
Date: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [lazarus] Progress


>
>On 8/31/99, at 7:47 PM, Michael A. Hess wrote:
>
>>What I am trying to make everyone understand is that the LCL doesn't
>>call any primitives to actually draw anything as far as components go.
>>You might call some primitives to do some actual drawing within a GTK
>>Drawing Widget but you can't CREATE or make an OwnerDrawn component when
>>using GTK unless you create it in "C" and add it to the GTK library.
>>
>>I ask again.    Is this clear???
>
>Is this an absolute requirement?  What I am saying, is that if the GTK
>library, as it exists now in C, does not have what is desired, and if
>someone is willing to go to the hellishly low levels of implementing it in
>FPC, is there any reason not to?  To make a ridiculous example...  If there
>were no button in GTK, would that mean that Lazarus could never have a
>button?  Or could someone implement a button widget in FPC, calling the
>lower level GTK C functions, and make this part of the LCL so that a button
>could exist in Lazarus, even though other GTK apps had no concept of one?
>While I agree wholeheartedly that if it already exists, use it, I don't see
>why we must abandon anything that isn't a part of every single platform,
>when it can be created.  What I am getting at is that,  if a GTK developer
>in C can create a new widget, why can't a Lazarus developer in FPC develop
>one as well, if there isn't already a C version?  Or is it better in your
>opinion to develop the widget in C, have it made part of the GTK, then wrap
>it into Lazarus?  While this would indeed work, personally, it seems to
>hold us at the mercy of each API that we support.  In other words, Lazarus
>can't have feature A until everyone else has feature A.  Surely this can't
>be your meaning?  What have I missed?
>
>Jeff.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>     To unsubscribe: mail lazarus-request at miraclec.com with
>                "unsubscribe" as the Subject
>    archives at http://www.miraclec.com/list_archives/lazarus
>