How would one go about controlling retrieving/setting the position of the mouse and triggier keyboard events on the operating system/X11 level? This is similar to functionality found in the Robot class in Java.
I understand there will most likely not be a cross platform solution, but how would one go about implementing this on Windows, Linux and Mac?
Please see robotgo, Golang Native cross-platform system automation
There are lots of ways to tackle this.
The project that appears closest to what you describe is "ui"
The next level up would be to use one of the go bindings that calls SDL, which might be easier.
Higher up the stack would be a toolkit like GTK, QT, FLTK, (or even X11 as BurntSushi5 mentioned, but I wouldn't recommend it.) Just search github for the toolkit and select by language.
ncurses bind - is the most lightweight solution I've found, all the others are parts of graphic or gaming engines
Related
I'd like to develop a desktop app with Ruby. However, I'd like to have a native GUI on every platform (as opposed to a cross-platform GUI Toolkit that looks consistently awful across all platforms).
I expect to have to do different GUIs for each platform (as it's not just looks but also behaviors and idioms that are different), but I wonder what my options are? Especially wondering if there is a clean way to separate front and backend and bind the data properly?
Target Platforms are Windows (Vista & 7, XP is a Bonus), Mac OS X (Cocoa) and Linux (GTK? Qt? No idea).
The Ruby language has excellent Qt library bindings and your scripts will be cross-platform.
Two Kinds of Cross-Platform
It turns out there are two kinds of cross-platform UI toolkits.
One kind draws its own controls, and, like you said, looks equally bad on all platforms. Even worse: it looks out-of-place on all except one.
But there is another kind that just provides a harmonized interface to the native widgets. The best of example of this kind of toolkit is SWT1.. It looks, it is, approximately fully native on each platform, yet it has but a single API.
So you shouldn't simply rule-out all cross-platform toolkits, just rule out the ones that fake the native UI.
Develop the Wrapper Interface
There is a second way. If your program's interface with the user can be directed through a relatively narrow interface, you can simply develop to that interface and then implement the bottom part of it for each platform you want to support. Yes, you have to rewrite one module, but all the other modules stay exactly the same and you get native widgets. You also get the smallest possible executable without lots of bloat.
Perhaps most importantly, you don't have a complex and opaque software layer between your code and the native windowing system. You will probably save as much time debugging as you spend writing the extra module for your first port.
1. I know my Java examples won't help you much unless you are using jRuby, but SWT vs Swing is a really pure example of the right-vs-wrong (IMHO) UI toolkit divide.
The WxWidgets interface claims to use the native interface on Windows, OS X, Linux and UNIX through one API.
Coworkers who have used it in the past enjoyed it well enough, but I've not used it myself.
I'm trying to develop a simple program in python (but this is not a requirement, I can switch to another language if worthwhile) and I'd like to make it very usable by elderly people, is there some GUI library already available?
Well, which OS platform are we standing in? If you are in linux or windows and using C# take a look at MonoDevelop. If in linux, I would stick with QT LAF and there's also GTK too.
Now, if I was in your position I would start making prototypes of the program and presenting them to the ederly, survey them through the process and make best of their inputs. It's not an easy task but it will do the work at the end of the process. Keep it simple and don't try to clutter up the ui design.
if your making a seperate GUI for elderly people it's probably best you make it yourself from whatever existing code/libraries you have.
Like increasing the element and text sizes, and increasing the contrast. But not too much that you make the majority feel patronised.
Most GUI libs support some kind of widgets that can be used for people that have some problem with their eyes or such. However, i don't think that there is a library that is particularly targetted to that. Hence, i would use GTK or Qt. In the end, it comes down to how you design your GUI.
After a long evaluation period of mainstream toolkits Qt, WxWidget, GTK i came to the conclusion that it does not make sense to religiously equalize the different platform. Now more then ever before.
In the days before Java portability meant, that platform dependent code was located in known places and should be small but not none. No write once, run everywhere marketing.
Is there any GUI tookit - experimental or commerical (even outdated or dead projects) - that is going this way. It would need to give me native widgets of course. I would like to have a look at them before i start my own toolkit
If you think this is a stupid idea tell me why (cause everybody else is doing it differently there may be a reason i don't see)
As someone who zealously believes that GUIs should be drawn with native widgets, I must say I've been very impressed with wxWidgets, although you mention that at the beginning.
As far as I know, wxWidgets uses native widgets whenever possible, and indeed it does also include platform-specific features that are neither possible nor relevant on other platforms. A good example of this is how you can use the native Mac OS X menu, while on other systems it won't do squat. There are other and better examples.
I must mention wxPython in particular, in case you either don't want to or just don't have the time to write a C++ program. wxPython astonished me when I tried it out first, and I even managed to make a stand-alone .exe file from it that worked on a fresh install of Windows 2000 without any updates or particular runtime environments.
If wxWidgets doesn't suit your needs, I wonder what would. :) Hurray for wxWidgets!
AFAIK, wxWidgets uses the platform's native widgets whenever possible.
Have a look at SWT, it tries to use the widgets of the underlying platform as much as possible.
We are planning to develop an application for monitoring and configuring our service (which is running on remote server). After long time of discussion, we decided for python as platform for our app, because we love and know python. But we don't know, what GUI toolkit preferred for our aims. We need fast (for development and running) app, whose users will be Admins, Maintainers and Account managers.
There are two GUI toolkit for python, which we know: wxPython and pyQT.
Anybody have arguments regarding pro and cons? And maybe someone knows any commercial applications, using these products (only python version of toolkits)? Links are desirable.
Thanks.
I choose wxPython after much research. The reasons were:
"wxPython in Action" book by Rappin & Dunn
The voluminous examples that come as part of the wxPython download
The number of projects that have used wxWidgets
The fact that wxPython code runs equally well on Linux, Mac OS/X and Win32
I did consider pyQT and other researchers are successfully using it. After writing many examples in all API's that I considered, I found wxPython ticked the most boxes for me.
As for Tkinter (TIX), I think it looks rather dated.
Unless you are using IronPython or Jython I would not consider using the associated native windowing APIs. For another project which is to be delivered exclusively on .Net, I plan to use WinForms after lots of great feedback from StackOverflow members.
Well, I am a fan of QT: it has a more modern look and feel. However - your choice should be based on your actual requirements. Simple trade studies are helpful for this. Make a list of what features your toolkit must have and what features would be nice to have and then weight each item appropriately. Then look at all your options (TKinter also) and then score them according to your feature list (using the weights you assigned to each feature requirement). At the end it should be evident which one is right for your project.
I've always liked Qt's "signals and slots" conceptual model, though I guess it may take a bit of learning for developers who are more used to other models of event propagation and handling. Personally, given a choice, I'd pick PyQt because of this programming aspect.
You wrote "There is two GUI toolkit for python, which we know: wxPython and pyQT." You are forgetting about the most obvious toolkit: tkinter. That's actually part of a core python distribution, no extra downloads required.
Some people don't like Tk but that's often due to ignorance. Tk is a fine choice for a cross platform toolkit. It uses native widgets on windows (and has for many years) and the latest versions of tk use themed widgets on all platforms.
i've been using wxpython for 3 years .. and now we had to switch into pyqt since qt is integrated in maya 2011 .. however , wxpython is more straight forward and you can easily start working on it and learn it from zero fast .it provides and awesome resources and decumentation . but QT provides more powerful features that you cant find in wxpython , for example ( the multi touch detection) , QT also provides good support for drawing devices like pc tablets and so on .
qt also provides a good designer that makes u create interfaces faster.
one of qt disadvantages is it's license since it's not free like wxpython
A Windows (and Mono) option for a GUI toolkit is provided by IronPython. It provides access to the Winforms and WPF libraries. For examples, see Developing with IronPython & Windows Forms, and many others.
If you want to expand the list of options, consider building a Web App instead of a (local) GUI app. You say your service runs on a remote server, so networking is part of your requirements.
Once you start down that road, Python provides a bewildering amount of options.
I want to point out two strengths that wxPython has compared to pyQt:
It uses native widgets on every supported platform. So the apps have a native look and feel. I'm aware that PyQt uses native styles, but the behavior ("the feel") is reported to be somewhat non-native especially on the Mac.
It provides a wider choice of widgets out of the box.
You should also check out PyGTK. It is similar to pyQT in programming model but does not have any licensing cost since it is LGPL. I always found it nice to work with as a developer. The main drawback over pyQT is that in some cases they take away functionality in things like file chooser dialogs in favour of simplicity for the user.
I want to start programming with D. I have a simple application in mind that needs a GUI but I want to make sure it's portable to Linux/Windows/Mac equally well and with minimal (no) change for each platform.
wxD is looking like the contender of choice because I know the wx toolkit already.
I see fltk4d as a contender and a (unfinished) wrapper around Qt.
Are there any other truly cross platform GUI toolkits for D that will go where I want with little effort and what would the the toolkit of choice for people here?
GtkD should be a very good option for you as a stable Windows/Linux/Mac GUI toolkit.
DWT was once considered the standard, it has its own newsgroup on the Digital Mars server and I think Walter Bright may have called it the standard too. I don't think it's completely working on Mac but this should change in the future.
Here is a nice list of some other options but most have less active development and/or are not yet ready for production.
I have not used any of D's GUI libraries, but I would go with wxD if I wanted to use one now. I would pick it because I think wxD would have the most native looking controls and is cross-platform. Especially since you already know wx, it looks like a good choice.
I'm actually writing a cross-platform GUI library, Dynamin, but I have not released it yet. It is not a port; ported libraries tend to not have as nice of APIs or take advantage of as many language features. But it is not far enough along to do more than simple programs. I also don't have a Mac backend or GTK theme yet.