Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Dec 1998 20:53:23 -0500 (EST)
From:      Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>
To:        John Sconiers <jrs@enteract.com>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: XWindows programing
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812102036530.329-100000@picnic.mat.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812101840530.6540-100000@adam.enteract.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, John Sconiers wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
> can some one point me to some info on xwindows programming.  Starting 
> a project and looking to find out somebasic and intermediate stuff. 

Several different approaches you could take, depending on how hard your
head is.  I'll try to summarize, but I just know I'm going to miss
someone's favorite ... oh, well ...

1. You could use a script language type approach, like tcl.  This
   hides most of the horrible detail, so if you're more worried about
   getting the task done than in pure learning, such an approach is
   pretty good.  Drawbacks include some definite loss of efficiency,
   but it's much less severe than it might sound, because most GUI
   programming isn't all that speed dependent.
2. One step below, find a language like Java.  Does all the graphics
   stuff, about the same level of efficiency as well written tcl.
   I personally like it better than tcl, because I think the syntax is
   a lot more regular, and the library support is fantastic.  Very good
   support via public tools AND very good commerical support, too.
   Drawbacks as in tcl, and it still hides most of the detail.
   Oh, yeah, extremely portable, too.
3. One big step back down are libraries like gnome, kde, V, I won't
   even try to name them all here.  Usually done in C++, these make
   building the code a lot more simple, because all the X calls are
   wrapped up in classes that do a good job of setting defaults.  If
   you like C++, this is a good choice.
4. Next step down is going to C, where the X calls are really written
   in.  I'm going to suggest at this level, the Motif libraries,
   because the widgets are written more regularly, documented much
   better, and your choice of widgets to use is wider.  You are going
   to have to deal with all those lousy defaults, but there is a
   wealth of Motif code out there, and if you MUST go down to this
   level, you'll appreciate Motif, and see why people use it.
5. Bottom level, using the X toolkit (Xt) libraries.  Looks something
   like Motif code, but the choices of widgets are more restricted.
   Consider it Motif programming for masochists.  This is in C, and
   probably the best docs are the LARGE set of manuals from O'Reilly.

You *could* be crazy and suggest that there's one more step down,
the X libs themselves.  I think I reserve that for folks writing
new toolkits, people with too much time on their hands.

If you pick a level here, reading suggestions could be made, many
folks reading this have already tried what you're going to do, and
have favorites to suggest.

----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Chuck Robey                 | Interests include any kind of voice or data 
chuckr@glue.umd.edu         | communications topic, C programming, and Unix.
213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1  |
Greenbelt, MD 20770         | I run Journey2 and picnic (FreeBSD-current)
(301) 220-2114              | and jaunt (NetBSD).
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9812102036530.329-100000>