I would like to build a GUI for an OCaml application I'm writing. My first idea was to use GTK+. I would like my application to run on Macs, Linux, Windows with a natural look and feel. I know that, while GTK+ uses X11 on the Mac by default (which looks awful), there is gtk-osx-application which uses quartz and looks natural and which I've just installed using macports.
I have three questions:
(1) Is it actually possible to use gtk-osx-application +quartz+no_x11 with OCaml? (My GODI installation which previously (with x11-based gtk2 in place) installed lablgtk2 with no problems, now (with gtk-osx-application +quartz+no_x11 and the previous x11-based gtk2 removed) is complaining about not finding /opt/local/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.0.dylib, which is x11 related. But, as far as I know, there's no way to choose quartz over x11 when installing lablgtk2 through GODI.)
(2) If I develop my code on my Mac using the gtk-osx-application, can I use the code as is for compilation in other platforms which use different GTKs or can this bring problems?
(3) If it does bring problems, do you know of any other environment for developing GUIs in OCaml that may potentially be good regarding both look and feel and still be readily cross-used? (I am aware of labltk but I'd prefer something with more capabilities, for example, the ability to use notebooks, a.k.a tabbed panels, and being able to use Glade for rapid GUI design.)
Thanks for any help!
Cheers,
Surikator
Assuming you can get lablgtk to work, it is probably your best bet at present.
To get it working: have you tried rebuilding lablgtk after removing X11 GTK and installing Quartz GTK? A LablGTK built against X11 GTK naturally won't work on a Quartz GTK, as it will be linked against the wrong library, but a rebuild might be successful. It could also be that LablGTK won't correctly detect that X11 integration calls don't work and therefore fail to build, but I would expect that to be not-too-difficult to fix as LablGTK does support Windows.
If you develop code for GTK on Mac, it should work on other platforms just fine. You'll want to test it, of course, but it should work. Do be careful to use the GTK facilities to make things like dialog button order work properly.
I think there was at one time a set of OCaml bindings to wxWidgets, but they do not seem to be widely used and wx is painful to work with in my experience. There has also been some work on making Qt bindings, which would be awesome, but I don't think there are any projects with good headway on that front yet.
If the UI is a small-ish piece of your project, you could look at decoupling it from the backend and writing the UI in C++ with Qt, or writing platform-native UIs, and having the UI call out to OCaml code in an embedded runtime to get the real work done. But that is likely more work and may not give you much benefit, depending on your application.
So: GTK is your best option in the current landscape.
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 read about wxRuby and Shoes but never used them. I want to learn ruby by developing a real-world serious Windows application. Among the available frameworks, which one is widely used and acceptable, rich in libraries and comes bundled with .exe builder?
There aren't a great deal of sensible choices for client/desktop applications in Ruby right now, however I believe one of your best options is to take advantage of mature JVM libraries via JRuby.
The Redcar text editor is written in Ruby and runs on the JVM, and you can view the source on Github here https://github.com/danlucraft/redcar
There is also a development company called Atomic Object that made a neat Ruby desktop app using JRuby with a fairly sophisticated GUI and you can view that here.
I've been thinking about the exact same problem as you and keeping and eye on my the options, these last few months :-)
I've also been using JRuby on the server-side and it's solid and reliable.
Finally, if it's Windows-only as you say, then you could consider using a .NET GUI Framework like WPF and build it using IronRuby, however IronRuby is not yet as mature as JRuby, so you could be exposing yourself to some risk there in terms of compatibility, bugs and performance (and for the record, I like IronRuby!).
However, the potential issues of using IronRuby might be balanced out by the gains you'd make using a GUI framework that's designed and optimised for Windows and is nicer than Swing. WPF is about as rich as it gets for GUI frameworks on Windows.
There are bindings for Qt on GitHub. I believe it's a fork from the Korundum bindings from KDE. However, I haven't tried it on Windows yet.
You might consider using RubyTk. Tk is a toolkit that works with many languages including ruby. For more information see tkdocs.com
disclaimer: I have no idea how widely used it is, though Tk in general is used in many places for both commercial, internal and open source projects.
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ruby_Programming/GUI_Toolkit_Modules will help
In terms of popularity, in 2008 shooes was most popular, but that has probably dropped.
http://www.pressure.to/ruby_gui_survey/
Since RubyInstaller project bundles now complete modern Tk distribution and bindings eliminating Windows installation woes- Tk seems the way to go.
With RubyGems I believe it is now possible to install GTK+ for this. So says this in Gems. This is a widely used framework, both in open source and industry. It is used in GIMP and, I think, presents a good windows system that is close to native and easily useable.
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.
I am working on a new small utility desktop application but I am not really able to choose the GUI framework to use. I have worked on both JAVA,C# and C++, so language is not really a constraint. My criteria are:-
A very well designed architecture, something like QT. It's better if it follows typical C++ design methodologies.
Layout management should be easy, intuitive and not really cumbersome. I hate adjusting pixels on screen.
Its license should be open.
It should look good :)
Mentioned QT seems to comply to all your requirements. QT has "deploy everywhere" attribute, whilst Java needs no deploying at all (it depends on what is use of your utility).
Ad. 2 QT has really convenient GUI designer.
Ad. 3 LGPL. Usually it is enough.
Ad. 4 It is always matter of taste. IMO QT4 looks awesome under linux, but it's windows look'n'feel is correct at best. It's strong point is, that without additional tweaks it almost everywhere looks native.
I've been using Swing, and it works fine. NetBeans (a decent IDE by itself) even supports graphical GUI building.
It's well designed (basically
everything is done with listeners,
functions that are registered for a
certain event). It has bindings, so
you don't have to write code to set
up a value in a text field or read
it out
Layout is not perfect, but
acceptable within NetBeans. It's
WYSIWYG (almost). Look-and-feel can
be changed on the fly.
License is free. Source-code is not
available, I think.
Looks fine on Windows and Linux,
less so on OSX.
You could always try SWT. The advantages of Java with the standard L&F of supported operating systems.
Well designed. Lots of
documentation, and very easy to
develop with. (If you know Swing,
you can pick up SWT in no time.)
I believe layout managers do exist
that support SWT. I'm not positive
about this though, as I typically
don't use layout managers too much.
Uses the Eclipse Public
License. Should meet most of
your requirements.
From Wikipedia on SWT:
SWT is written in Java. To display GUI elements, the SWT implementation accesses the native GUI libraries of the operating system using JNI (Java Native Interface) in a manner that is similar to those programs written using operating system-specific APIs. Programs that call SWT are portable, but the implementation of the toolkit, despite the fact that it is written in Java, is unique for each platform.
Hope that helps you.
I'd suggest wxWidgets if you want to program in C++ or wxPython (the python language binding of wxWidgets if you know or don't mind learning Python.
Architecture is similar to QT I think.
Layout using sizers. Quite easy once you get the hang of it.
Liberal open source license.
Widgets are native on all platforms (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux).
I work in the embedded world, using mainly C and no GUI at all (because there is no display screen).
Moving over to the non-embedded world, in which I have nearly no experience, what is the best programming environment (langauge/IDE/etc) for me to build a simple window-form application that will run on all the common platforms: windows/linux/mac-os ?
I do not want to build a web-app.
I have my eye on Python and one of it's widget libraries, QT or WxWidgets. Is that a good option ?
I like GTK+ personally but that or any of the ones you mentioned should be OK. I don't know which is the best in terms of least RAM usage.
Both wx and QT have embedded/universal versions where the widgets are drawn directly.
They can both be called from python,but if you have a very small system python or py2exe might not be available.
Unless you want to embed HtmlWindow I'd go with wxWindows... works everywhere without problems so far for me.
I have both worked with PyQt and wxPython extensively.
PyQt is better designed and comes with very good UI designer so that you can quickly assemble your UI
wxPython has a very good demo and it can do pretty much anything which PyQT can do, I would anyday prefer PyQt but it may bot be free for commercial purpose but wxPython is free and is decent cross platform library.
Qt is a good choice to start with. In my opinion it has a best (easy to use, simple & informative) API Documentation. Package also includes many examples - from very basic to complex. And, yep, it`s truly crossplatform.
Check Qt Licensing page, the library is free only for GPL projects.
I`m using QDevelop as text editor, but there are many other alternatives - Eclipse, KDevelop, Code:Blocks, VS plugin & etc.
Why not use swing and java? It is quite cross platform, and looks reasonable for form apps. If you squint a bit and ignore the java, its quite pleasant - or alternatively, use one of them dynamic languages on the JVM (Groovy is my recommended one).
What kind of application is it going to be? Have you considered a web-based application instead? Web-based apps can be super flexible in that sense - you can run them on any platform that has a modern browser.
By far the simplest choice for creating native cross-platform applications is REALbasic. Give it a try and you'll have a working app for Mac OS X, Windows and Linux in minutes. No run-times or other stuff to worry about.
I think you should try Html Application.It is something like web page it contain DHTML,java script,ActiveX but it is execute like .exe .
Edit:
Sorry for advice you html application.I just know it can run on windows only.