Re: [rgui-dev] ParaGUI or ClanLib binding

[Massimiliano Mirra]

On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 02:06:40AM -0600, Tom Sawyer wrote:
> at one level all the backends do the same thing, including paragui.
> (i.e. you standard widgets) so any GUtopIa program can run across the
> board on any of them. but none of the other backends will be a able to
> handle the gaming api aspect, only paragui with rudl will be able to do
> that. so basically we'll have a RUDL extension api, i.e. addtional
> components just for this.
> 
> my first thought is simply to have GUtopIa throw an error if someone
> tries to run a GUtopIa program that uses these extension components via
> another backend. what else can we do? we could also make the RUDL
> extensions an optional add-in when Paragui/Ruby is designated as the
> backend. your thought?

Here's an idea taken from Debian packaging system (which to a degree
I'm trying to replicate in rpkg):


Meta data of an application that runs on GUtopIa:

Application: RubyPlot
Requires: Graph, CommandLine, Menu
Suggests: GLCanvas

Meta data of three backends:

Backend: Tk
Provides: Menu, Canvas, Text, Graph

Backend: ParaGUI
Provides: Menu, Canvas, Text, Graph, CommandLine, GLCanvas

Backend: GTK
Provides: Menu, DragAndDrop, Canvas, Text, Graph, CommandLine

An installation program may look at the Requires: field of the
application meta data, and see which backends fit.  In this case, GTK
and ParaGUI would allow to start the application.  It might also
choose (or give the user the chance to choose) which backends fits
*better*.  For example, whereas the GTK backend will lack the support
for GL stuff (maybe for 3D plots), which in itself is not mandatory
(i.e. the program can run, although crippled), the ParaGUI backend
will allow the program to run full-featured.

> i know a lot of people are going to be floored when they see a
> working alpha release in a matter of weeks instead of months! :-)

I already am, seeing how much ferment you were able to inject into
this project. :-)

Massimiliano