On 28 Jan 2000, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Duncan" == Duncan Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Duncan> Do not hold your breath, since I need to get a PhD, but it
> Duncan> occurs to me that GUI independence would be accelerated by
> Duncan> having some common cases as re-usable widgets or something
> Duncan> spiritually similar. How many boxes have a message and yes, no
> Duncan> and cancel buttons? Would it not make sense to have a gettext
> Duncan> aware version of such a box---it seems this could convert a
> Duncan> lot of boxen quite quickly.
>
> Duncan> I guess the first step would be writing a XForms version of
> Duncan> the idea above and using it instead of custom boxes
> Duncan> everywhere. I will look at this some time modulo dealing with
> Duncan> OLE archives on C++ implementations without overidable
> Duncan> sys_read, sys_write and sys_seek functions (the documentation
> Duncan> incidates these are specific to my iostream implementation).
> Duncan> Does the standard have anything equivilent? (I can not RTFS
> Duncan> myself).
>
> Isn't this idea similar to what we have in lyx_gui_misc.[Ch]? Of
> course functions like WriteAlert() will be ported to other toolkits.
Exactly, XForms already provides the facilities for these common yes/no
type dialogs. And we use them already. Similarly, KLyX has an
implementation of the very dialog in the same manner. So you don't have
to worry, these facilities already exist ;-)
Allan. (ARRae)
