Re: xemacs/gtk
"Christophe Prud'homme" <prudhomm(a)mit.edu> writes:
I have followed the gtk/xemacs development and I just recompiled
gtk-xemacs and I must say Woo!
Everything compiled fine and work fine so far, great job!
in gtk/xemacs pages, qt is mentioned, will there be any port to this
other toolkit? qt has an Xt extension. Would it help the port?
Doing the Qt work would be easier because of the Xt support. The reason I
ended up doing the GTK port were because part of the port was also doing
the language bindings. This would have been more difficult with Qt, as
well as requiring a C++ compiler, and the licensing issues (real or
imagined). The xemacs-beta archives should have some of this discussion as
well as the doc at http://www.cs.indiana.edu/elisp/gui-xemacs/arch.html
But doing a native Qt port would be nice for cross-platform reasons. In
theory the remaining X specific parts of XEmacs/GTK could be removed and
you could have XEmacs on windows use GTK as well. Not to mention the
framebuffer (Qt looks much better than GTK on the framebuffer right now,
but work is progressing on both).
This would be good when people port Qt or GTK to BeOS and MacOS X, etc,
etc.
-Bill P.