From: Friedrich Dominicus
Subject: Quality of gtk bindings?
Date: 
Message-ID: <87mzalnk6q.fsf@flarge.here>
Well I'm quite aware that there to exist quit a few bindings. I wonder
about the quality differences between them. Has anyone tried the
different ones and would not mind to share his/her findings?

Regards
Friedrich

-- 
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
From: Ken Tilton
Subject: Re: Quality of gtk bindings?
Date: 
Message-ID: <3hOAg.601$3U4.396@fe12.lga>
Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> Well I'm quite aware that there to exist quit a few bindings. I wonder
> about the quality differences between them. Has anyone tried the
> different ones and would not mind to share his/her findings?

I do not use Cells-Gtk, but I subscribe to the list and see occasional 
patches, so it is active anyway. Plus you get Cells*, which are great 
generally but really stand out for GUIs.

I am not familiar with the other binding sets.

kt

* Cells-GTk has not yet been ported to the latest/greatest Cells-3, and 
it should be, but it  could get interesting so I can understand the 
reticence.

-- 
Cells: http://common-lisp.net/project/cells/

"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
    -- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon
From: Pedro Kröger
Subject: Re: Quality of gtk bindings?
Date: 
Message-ID: <1154808846.222666.272920@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> Well I'm quite aware that there to exist quit a few bindings. I wonder
> about the quality differences between them. Has anyone tried the
> different ones and would not mind to share his/her findings?

clg is a great binding for gtk2:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/clg/

it's very lispy and the main developer is very helpful. It needs more
documentation, but it also needs more users, so it'll have more people
to work on it.

Pedro Kröger
comp.lang.lisp / 2006 / aug