[Lazarus] MDI implementation

Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho felipemonteiro.carvalho at gmail.com
Wed Nov 16 16:53:15 CET 2011

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Hans-Peter Diettrich
<DrDiettrich1 at aol.com> wrote:
> This reminds me on "native" CommCtrls, which don't exist on non-Win32
> widgetsets. When all these controls come in a *portable* and a *Win32*
> flavor, the implementation would be simplified a lot.

I am writing the custom drawn equivalents of CommCtrls and I don't
remember meeting Windowsims. There do are lots and lots of features in
each control, but that other widgetsets don't support them in itself
is not a windowism. The vast majority of features in CommCtrls are
very generic. The problem of widgetsets having different capabilities
is very natural, you can't expect sets of controls written by
unrelated people to be 100% equivalent in all features. They are not,
and never will be. The people which write those controls don't claim
that they are compatible with anything else, so why should we expect
them to be? The more exotic the widgetset the worse.

Of course all of this generates reliability issues and a burdain on
people maintaining/porting the LCL, but that is not an unsolvable
problem. It is your choice to use a native widgetset and native
widgets, if you don't like them you should be using the custom drawn
widgets and work in the customdrawn widgetset:


Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho

More information about the Lazarus mailing list