[lazarus] Progress

Samuel Liddicott sam at campbellsci.co.uk
Fri Sep 3 05:49:50 EDT 1999

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael A. Hess [mailto:mhess at miraclec.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 1999 05:15 PM
> To: lazarus at miraclec.com
> Subject: Re: [lazarus] Progress
> Samuel Liddicott wrote:
> >
> > > How will this be able to support themes?
> > >
> > > How will this be able to support DnD?
> > >
> > > How will this be able to support Corba?
> >
> > It jolly well won't unless the developer adds that.
> Well that is the whole point of the LCL API independence.

Do we want GTK dependance or independance?  I thought we wanted

> We are
> currently working on the GTK interface design.

Which is what most of the discussion is about.

> It will not take that
> much effort to then make a Gnome interface design. All of the above
> things are already handled by Gnome so all of the components
> automatically deal with all of these features for you.

> This also goes
> for the KDE libraries. Why reinvent the wheel. Use what already exists.

Its because I want to use what already exists that I'm talking about it.

> Don't get too focused on thinking about how Delphi does things. In some
> cases they are far from the best solution.

Is this, or is it not, Delphi for Linux?
And in this case avoiding wndproc just because GTK doesn't need it, is
becoming API specific, which is not sensible especially as we are already
away of two styles of API that REQUIRE wndprocs.

again, are we API specific, or not?

I say not, hence the need for abstraction.
Are we working on Delphi for linux, or just some other object-pascal visual
builder?  I thought it was Delphi for linux.


More information about the Lazarus mailing list