RE: [gsl-dev] GTK+ v FLTK

[Murray Cumming Comneon com]

> On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 08:46, Murray Cumming Comneon com wrote:
> > > From: Sander Vesik [mailto:sander_traveling yahoo co uk] 
> > > I think it would end up being a third binding for a bunch of 
> > > additional reasons
> > > aswell. Last I looked inti was much more natural, but this 
> > > could be due to bias as
> > > to how bindings should work.
> > 
> > Please please tell me what you mean.
> 
> 	If OO.o should choose to use gtk+ they would have to 
> provide another
> C++ wrapper of it - since they want an UNO binding; due to the way UNO
> works[1], and the thread safety code that will be needed - my 
> feeling is
> that the only sensible way to do it is by re-wrapping the C underlying
> API. 

Sorry, I quoted too much. I wanted to know what the difference between the
gtkmm and Inti API are.

Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net
www.murrayc.com