Hi,
I don't understand if there is a Common Lisp GUI framework
(especiallly for Win32), with a GUI designer. I'm not looking for a
free license, having to shell out some money is OK. Since we can buy
LispWorks licenses, it should work with a free Lisp or with LispWorks.
Thanks.
Elena schrieb:
> OK, I just jound out that LispWorks has CAPI. I hope it has a nice GUI
> designer too.
It depends on what you expect from the GUI designer...
Only last week I used it (Lispworks Professionals �Interface builder�,
which is how they call it) to set up a small gui.
It really helps if you compare it with manually writing the code.
The builder creates the code for you, and you can then fine tune it, if
you feel this is need.
Just be aware that if you are used to a tool like Matisse (the GUI
builder from NetBeans), then you may be a little bit disappointed.
Lispworks does not have the ressources to put 15000 man hours into that
tool.
Anyway, I find that it clearly works and for me it helped me to reduce
the time to get the gui done. CAPI works also on non-Windows plattforms
(if you should ever need that).
Andr�
--
Lisp is not dead. It�s just the URL that has changed:
http://clojure.org/
Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
as well, for Windows at least.
I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
Thanks.
Elena wrote:
> Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
> an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
> as well, for Windows at least.
>
> I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
>
I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
advantage matters compared to other issues.
The good news is that I hear from a lot of people who are happy with
CAPI, so you are good to go anyway.
kt
On Mar 16, 1:26 am, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Elena wrote:
> > Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
> > an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
> > as well, for Windows at least.
>
> > I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
>
> I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
> mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
> an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
> advantage matters compared to other issues.
The OP said she has to "sell" CL to management - and management (in my
limited experience) is likely to think a "GUI builder" is a great
thing, even if developers will actually use it only marginally, if
they use it at all. Also in my experience the actual quality of the
GUI builder does not matter much: just say them it exists and they'll
be happy :D
To get more on topic, I do not know the LispWorks Interface Builder;
André mentioned Matisse (the NetBeans GUI Builder) - Matisse is very
good, until you have to touch the code (and, surprise, you often have
to!). So if the CAPI GUI builder generates sensible code and lets you
modify it, even if it's less featureful then Matisse, I'd consider it
to be superior ;)
Just my €.02
Alessio
Alessio Stalla wrote:
> On Mar 16, 1:26 am, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>>> Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
>>> an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
>>> as well, for Windows at least.
>>> I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
>> I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
>> mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
>> an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
>> advantage matters compared to other issues.
>
> The OP said she has to "sell" CL to management - and management (in my
> limited experience) is likely to think a "GUI builder" is a great
> thing, even if developers will actually use it only marginally, if
> they use it at all. Also in my experience the actual quality of the
> GUI builder does not matter much: just say them it exists and they'll
> be happy :D
If you want to sell into resistance don't eliminate any chance of
success by buying into your target audience's misconceptions. You'll
lose the sale and your self respect. If GUI builders are retarded (they
are) then explain that to them. Your only hope is that they respect your
conviction and decide you are probably right because you seem to have
given some thought to it and they sure as hell know they did not thye
are just doing what everyone else is doing. There is no hope in playing
it safe because they will smell the fear, scorn the toadying, and show
you out the door.
>
> To get more on topic, I do not know the LispWorks Interface Builder;
> Andr� mentioned Matisse (the NetBeans GUI Builder) - Matisse is very
> good, until you have to touch the code (and, surprise, you often have
> to!). So if the CAPI GUI builder generates sensible code and lets you
> modify it, even if it's less featureful then Matisse, I'd consider it
> to be superior ;)
Oh, great, already we are trying to figure out how to deal with why GUI
builders suck. Did you even notice that you segued into that? Kind of
hard to avoid, right? Anyone who cannot "sell" the uselessness of GUI
builders should find someone else to make the pitch.
One of Tilton's Top 3 Laws has to be Solve the Right Problem. Mgmt won't
use X because it does not have a GUI builder? There is no problem in X
not having a GUI builder, so do not fix that. The problem is selling
mgmt. Work on that.
btw, when people start making objections A, B, and C to X they just
don't want X, another reason not to take ABC seriously. Talk about the
pluses of X, that is what they want to hear.
kt
On 17 Mar, 11:49, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want to sell into resistance don't eliminate any chance of
> success by buying into your target audience's misconceptions. You'll
> lose the sale and your self respect.
Nope, I always try to follow the path with least resistance. Kind of
what Michelangelo made:
http://www3.telus.net/st_simons/digest97.htm
I'll win and increase my self respect. You bet!
Cheers
Elena wrote:
> On 17 Mar, 11:49, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you want to sell into resistance don't eliminate any chance of
>> success by buying into your target audience's misconceptions. You'll
>> lose the sale and your self respect.
>
> Nope, I always try to follow the path with least resistance. Kind of
> what Michelangelo made:
>
> http://www3.telus.net/st_simons/digest97.htm
>
> I'll win and increase my self respect. You bet!
>
> Cheers
only if your self-respect allows the practice of deception.
but fine, you gather the marble debris, I'll get the scaffold.
kt
On 19 Mar, 01:37, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Elena wrote:
> > Nope, I always try to follow the path with least resistance. Kind of
> > what Michelangelo made:
>
> >http://www3.telus.net/st_simons/digest97.htm
>
> > I'll win and increase my self respect. You bet!
>
> > Cheers
>
> only if your self-respect allows the practice of deception.
>
> but fine, you gather the marble debris, I'll get the scaffold.
>
> kt
If you call it deception... BTW, the story about Michelangelo as I
knew it has a further detail: Michelangelo realized that Soderini was
looking at the sculpture from a wrong angle, so he made him move a bit
before showing him the nose again. Should Michelangelo have spoken his
mind? I don't think so: you know, often when people state something,
they are going to stick with it. You have to deal with human
psychology. Resistance to change. So, how much would you think I'd
have to fight to introduce both an unusual looking language and a
entirely different way of accomplishing tasks, whereas I'm struggling
myself to learn such new ways? I'm not going to lie, just trying to
present things in a reassuring and familiar way.
Cheers
On Mar 18, 10:01 pm, Elena <········@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you call it deception... BTW, the story about Michelangelo as I
> knew it has a further detail: Michelangelo realized that Soderini was
> looking at the sculpture from a wrong angle, so he made him move a bit
> before showing him the nose again. Should Michelangelo have spoken his
> mind? I don't think so: you know, often when people state something,
> they are going to stick with it. You have to deal with human
> psychology. Resistance to change. So, how much would you think I'd
> have to fight to introduce both an unusual looking language and a
> entirely different way of accomplishing tasks, whereas I'm struggling
> myself to learn such new ways? I'm not going to lie, just trying to
> present things in a reassuring and familiar way.
>
> Cheers
Although this is kind of a roundabout way of doing it (and maybe, not
worth your time, or it is too time-consuming), I would suggest taking
a look at ABCL - it is a Common Lisp implementation that runs
completely in a Java VM. I will - hopefully - be incorporating it into
my main programming project, in the future.
ABCL allows you to have Java code calling Common Lisp code and vice
versa, quite smoothly. The reason(s) I hope to use it, are so that I
can get a Common Lisp application running wherever there's a Java VM,
and so I can use the Swing, or AWT, toolkits for a GUI. :)
I hope you find this helpful, Elena.
On 19 Mar, 03:51, Nick Saika <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 18, 10:01 pm, Elena <········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Although this is kind of a roundabout way of doing it (and maybe, not
> worth your time, or it is too time-consuming), I would suggest taking
> a look at ABCL - it is a Common Lisp implementation that runs
> completely in a Java VM.
Thanks for your suggestion. I did know about ABCL, but I discovered
it's meant to be an embeddable Lisp, therefore has some limitations,
most notably slowness. The Java interoperability is also too low
level, and there aren't libraries which offer enough syntactic sugar
in this regard. Kudos to the implementor, anyway, it must have been a
lot of effort.
In the realm of Java based Lisps, I'm familiarizing myself with
Clojure, a Lisp dialect which addresses the already mentioned issues
(speed and easy Java interoperability).
>
> ABCL allows you to have Java code calling Common Lisp code and vice
> versa, quite smoothly. The reason(s) I hope to use it, are so that I
> can get a Common Lisp application running wherever there's a Java VM,
> and so I can use the Swing, or AWT, toolkits for a GUI. :)
>
> I hope you find this helpful, Elena.
On Mar 19, 7:19 pm, Elena <········@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 Mar, 03:51, Nick Saika <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 18, 10:01 pm, Elena <········@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Although this is kind of a roundabout way of doing it (and maybe, not
> > worth your time, or it is too time-consuming), I would suggest taking
> > a look at ABCL - it is a Common Lisp implementation that runs
> > completely in a Java VM.
>
> Thanks for your suggestion. I did know about ABCL, but I discovered
> it's meant to be an embeddable Lisp, therefore has some limitations,
> most notably slowness.
I have no data to back my claims up, but, while ABCL can be embedded
in Java, it has a full-fledged Lisp-to-Java-bytecode compiler, so I
don't think it's really slow. It has some performance problems with
early versions of Java 1.6, but they've been resolved by Sun's updates
to the JRE.
> The Java interoperability is also too low
> level, and there aren't libraries which offer enough syntactic sugar
> in this regard. Kudos to the implementor, anyway, it must have been a
> lot of effort.
About this I agree, the Java FFI is quite low-level. There's an ABCL-
specific invoke.lisp floating on the net that allows for friendlier
syntax (but AFAIK requires also a Java class on the classpath). I'm
also working on a little syntactic sugar library called sexy-java
which, while being a bit more verbose and a bit less powerful than
invoke.lisp, is much shorter and written entirely in Lisp. I'm also
working (veeery slowly) on a Swing-based GUI DSL on top of ABCL.
Unfortunately, it is still only slightly past the proof-of-concept
phase - not very usable even in toy apps.
Alessio
> In the realm of Java based Lisps, I'm familiarizing myself with
> Clojure, a Lisp dialect which addresses the already mentioned issues
> (speed and easy Java interoperability).
>
>
>
> > ABCL allows you to have Java code calling Common Lisp code and vice
> > versa, quite smoothly. The reason(s) I hope to use it, are so that I
> > can get a Common Lisp application running wherever there's a Java VM,
> > and so I can use the Swing, or AWT, toolkits for a GUI. :)
>
> > I hope you find this helpful, Elena.
>
>
Elena wrote:
> On 19 Mar, 01:37, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>>> Nope, I always try to follow the path with least resistance. Kind of
>>> what Michelangelo made:
>>> http://www3.telus.net/st_simons/digest97.htm
>>> I'll win and increase my self respect. You bet!
>>> Cheers
>> only if your self-respect allows the practice of deception.
>>
>> but fine, you gather the marble debris, I'll get the scaffold.
>>
>> kt
>
> If you call it deception...
Oh, sure. Put it on me! M deliberately and consciously undertook a
course of behavior intended to resemble the act of reducing the size of
the nose, simulating removal by making hammering motions producing
hammer sounds and dropping stuff previously gathered from the floor to
complete the simulation. He then acquiesced to the other's mistaken
conclusion that the nose was now smaller.
And you do not think that qualifies as deception? Lessee:
"Deception (also called beguilement or subterfuge) is the act of
convincing another to believe information that is not true, or not the
whole truth as in certain types of half-truths. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deception
Hmmm, maybe I got lucky. Lessee:
"An instance of actions and/or schemes fabricated to mislead and/or
delude someone into errantly believing a lie or inaccuracy"
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/deception
Reminds me of something. Last try:
"Pretending to chisel a nose to make someone think you made it smaller."
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=deceptive
Ha!
> BTW, the story about Michelangelo as I
> knew it has a further detail: Michelangelo realized that Soderini was
> looking at the sculpture from a wrong angle, so he made him move a bit
> before showing him the nose again. Should Michelangelo have spoken his
> mind? I don't think so: you know, often when people state something,
> they are going to stick with it. You have to deal with human
> psychology. Resistance to change.
Well it certainly is a fascinating problem into which as much energy has
been poured by mankind I wager as anything else: Changing Other People.
Whether to win a presidency or sell used cars. And there are certainly
many schools of thought and I certainly have had no success at it. Well,
not none, but few and far between and generally only when my credibility
had been established some other way.
I have a good friend who was very bright and became a great salesman (in
software mostly) who used to share insights on the process. I wish I
could remember the terminology. But you seem to be on track and
unhindered by a moral compass I like your chances. :)
> So, how much would you think I'd
> have to fight to introduce both an unusual looking language and a
> entirely different way of accomplishing tasks, whereas I'm struggling
> myself to learn such new ways? I'm not going to lie, just trying to
> present things in a reassuring and familiar way.
Yer screwed. If you were a master of these novel tools you might pull
off a hard sell, but still feeling your way around yourself you are
defenseless when the naysayers pounce, and pounce they will. Suggest you
fly me in and let me make a "presentation" at the nearest pub,
preferably one with the latest closing time legal in your hamlet. I'll
get them fired up. I'll get something fired, anyway.
kenny
---------------------
Have Parentheses. Will Travel. (c) 2009
On Mar 18, 11:12 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Have Parentheses. Will Travel. (c) 2009
Have Parenthesis Will Travel reads the card of Kenzo
casting his pearls before the savage yobbos
This lisp hand for hire shuns tall buildings for sun
a coder of fortune is the man called Ken Tilton
Ken Tilton, Ken Tilton why do you code?
Ken Tilton, Ken Tilton, always in lisp mode
Raffael Cavallaro wrote:
> On Mar 18, 11:12 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Have Parentheses. Will Travel. (c) 2009
>
> Have Parenthesis Will Travel reads the card of Kenzo
> casting his pearls before the savage yobbos
>
> This lisp hand for hire shuns tall buildings for sun
> a coder of fortune is the man called Ken Tilton
>
> Ken Tilton, Ken Tilton why do you code?
> Ken Tilton, Ken Tilton, always in lisp mode
>
We're gonna need a name for the horse.
kt
ps. Nice: "coder of fortune". k
Kenneth Tilton wrote:
> Raffael Cavallaro wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 11:12 pm, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Have Parentheses. Will Travel. (c) 2009
>>
>> Have Parenthesis Will Travel reads the card of Kenzo
>> casting his pearls before the savage yobbos
>>
>> This lisp hand for hire shuns tall buildings for sun
>> a coder of fortune is the man called Ken Tilton
>>
>> Ken Tilton, Ken Tilton why do you code?
>> Ken Tilton, Ken Tilton, always in lisp mode
>>
>
> We're gonna need a name for the horse.
>
> kt
>
> ps. Nice: "coder of fortune". k
In case folks are scratching their heads:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Have_Gun,_Will_Travel
The thinking man's western.
k
Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
+---------------
| We're gonna need a name for the horse.
+---------------
MACRO, of course. What else would a Lisper ride on?
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <····@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
Rob Warnock wrote:
> Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> +---------------
> | We're gonna need a name for the horse.
> +---------------
>
> MACRO, of course. What else would a Lisper ride on?
Hi, ho, Macroooooo!.....It's not working for me, Rob.
kt
On Mar 20, 2:51 am, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rob Warnock wrote:
> > Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +---------------
> > | We're gonna need a name for the horse.
> > +---------------
>
> > MACRO, of course. What else would a Lisper ride on?
>
> Hi, ho, Macroooooo!.....It's not working for me, Rob.
>
> kt
Hi-ho Sex-p, away!
;^)
On 19 Mar, 04:12, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, sure. Put it on me! M deliberately and consciously undertook a
> course of behavior intended to resemble the act of reducing the size of
> the nose, simulating removal by making hammering motions producing
> hammer sounds and dropping stuff previously gathered from the floor to
> complete the simulation. He then acquiesced to the other's mistaken
> conclusion that the nose was now smaller.
>
> And you do not think that qualifies as deception? ...
Hmmm... I failed in deceiving this guy ;-)
> Suggest you
> fly me in and let me make a "presentation" at the nearest pub,
> preferably one with the latest closing time legal in your hamlet. I'll
> get them fired up.
It's a Bird… It's a Plane… It's SuperLispMan :-D
Let's look around for some Perltonite ;-)
Jokes apart, I think it would be nice to meet you in person, you seem
such a sharp guy. You can never tell...
> I'll get something fired, anyway.
Something or someone? If that someone is me, I don't care. I need some
time for myself.
Elena wrote:
>> Suggest you
>> fly me in and let me make a "presentation" at the nearest pub,
>> preferably one with the latest closing time legal in your hamlet. I'll
>> get them fired up.
>
> It's a Bird� It's a Plane� It's SuperLispMan :-D
I am afraid it's a little closer to The Joker.
>
> Let's look around for some Perltonite ;-)
>
> Jokes apart, I think it would be nice to meet you in person, you seem
> such a sharp guy. You can never tell...
I don't know. I see in another thread you are now recommending Scheme
over Common Lisp, things could get ugly towards closing.
Speaking of which, I just swung by the new home of the last stop of Lisp
NYC's monthly pub crawl, er, technology exchange and not only is it
magnificent but it will have food (and Tommy always served good food,
even when the kitchen was more of a closet) and a private party room
complete with pool table.
April 14, here we come!
kt
On 20 Mar, 10:08, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Elena wrote:
> > Jokes apart, I think it would be nice to meet you in person, you seem
> > such a sharp guy. You can never tell...
>
> I don't know. I see in another thread you are now recommending Scheme
> over Common Lisp, things could get ugly towards closing.
:-)))))
Sometimes it's very funny how people express their ideas in a foreign
language and don't realize what they are really saying. This time it
was my time.
>
> Speaking of which, I just swung by the new home of the last stop of Lisp
> NYC's monthly pub crawl, er, technology exchange and not only is it
> magnificent but it will have food (and Tommy always served good food,
> even when the kitchen was more of a closet) and a private party room
> complete with pool table.
Sadly I live very far away.
Elena wrote:
> On 20 Mar, 10:08, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>>> Jokes apart, I think it would be nice to meet you in person, you seem
>>> such a sharp guy. You can never tell...
>> I don't know. I see in another thread you are now recommending Scheme
>> over Common Lisp, things could get ugly towards closing.
>
> :-)))))
>
> Sometimes it's very funny how people express their ideas in a foreign
> language and don't realize what they are really saying. This time it
> was my time.
No, I did not take it wrong* at all. To be honest things always get ugly
towards closing time at Lisp meets.
>
>> Speaking of which, I just swung by the new home of the last stop of Lisp
>> NYC's monthly pub crawl, er, technology exchange and not only is it
>> magnificent but it will have food (and Tommy always served good food,
>> even when the kitchen was more of a closet) and a private party room
>> complete with pool table.
>
> Sadly I live very far away.
That's how I feel and I am just down at the Jersey shore. Well, start a
Lisp social club and I'll add your burg to my world tour to promote
web-cells (qooxdoo is slipping--lost my fear of HTML/CSS and getting
weary of 700k .js files and beating my head against even a high-quality
framework-- Lispers do not use OPC!).
kt
* I think you got Johan fired up, though. k
Elena <········@gmail.com> writes:
> Jokes apart, I think it would be nice to meet you in person, you seem
> such a sharp guy. You can never tell...
Go for it, Kenny.
On Mar 17, 11:49 am, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alessio Stalla wrote:
> > On Mar 16, 1:26 am, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Elena wrote:
> >>> Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
> >>> an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
> >>> as well, for Windows at least.
> >>> I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
> >> I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
> >> mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
> >> an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
> >> advantage matters compared to other issues.
>
> > The OP said she has to "sell" CL to management - and management (in my
> > limited experience) is likely to think a "GUI builder" is a great
> > thing, even if developers will actually use it only marginally, if
> > they use it at all. Also in my experience the actual quality of the
> > GUI builder does not matter much: just say them it exists and they'll
> > be happy :D
>
> If you want to sell into resistance don't eliminate any chance of
> success by buying into your target audience's misconceptions. You'll
> lose the sale and your self respect. If GUI builders are retarded (they
> are) then explain that to them. Your only hope is that they respect your
> conviction and decide you are probably right because you seem to have
> given some thought to it and they sure as hell know they did not thye
> are just doing what everyone else is doing. There is no hope in playing
> it safe because they will smell the fear, scorn the toadying, and show
> you out the door.
>
In principle, I agree with you. If management was sane, they would
listen to technical advice from programmers when choosing a
technology. However in practice I found out that sometimes management
does not see the obvious, because they adhere to a certain
preconception (e.g. that having a GUI builder is absolutely
necessary). In these cases you can either:
- change management (i.e. get another job)
- stick to what management says (use X because it has a really cool
GUI bulder)
- use a little deception :) and sell them Y is cool too because it
also has a GUI builder and much more features that X (you won't use
the GUI builder, just the cool features, but management does not have
to know that).
The third approach is risky - as you say, you can easily fall into
your own trap and have to live forever with a bad choice which you
could have avoided if only you had pushed management a little further
and made them realize they were addressing a false problem. But, sadly
sometimes it's the better option (IMHO).
>
> > To get more on topic, I do not know the LispWorks Interface Builder;
> > André mentioned Matisse (the NetBeans GUI Builder) - Matisse is very
> > good, until you have to touch the code (and, surprise, you often have
> > to!). So if the CAPI GUI builder generates sensible code and lets you
> > modify it, even if it's less featureful then Matisse, I'd consider it
> > to be superior ;)
>
> Oh, great, already we are trying to figure out how to deal with why GUI
> builders suck. Did you even notice that you segued into that? Kind of
> hard to avoid, right? Anyone who cannot "sell" the uselessness of GUI
> builders should find someone else to make the pitch.
>
> One of Tilton's Top 3 Laws has to be Solve the Right Problem. Mgmt won't
> use X because it does not have a GUI builder? There is no problem in X
> not having a GUI builder, so do not fix that. The problem is selling
> mgmt. Work on that.
>
> btw, when people start making objections A, B, and C to X they just
> don't want X, another reason not to take ABC seriously. Talk about the
> pluses of X, that is what they want to hear.
Next time I'll try harder, thanks for all the advice ;)
A.
On 16 Mar, 00:26, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Elena wrote:
> > Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
> > an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
> > as well, for Windows at least.
>
> > I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
>
> I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
> mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
> an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
> advantage matters compared to other issues.
Is a GUI Builder a GUI-based tool for building GUIs? If so what's
wrong with them? If GUI's are good for anything shouldn't they be good
for
making GUIs?
I've used visual tools to build simple GUIs. It seems preferable to
counting pixels or drawing dialog boxes on graph paper. Is there a
third way?
Can you use lisp to build yourself a GUI specifier that is so
cool you wouldn't want to touch a GUI Builder with someeone elses
barge
pole?
> The good news is that I hear from a lot of people who are happy with
> CAPI, so you are good to go anyway.
····················@hotmail.com wrote:
> On 16 Mar, 00:26, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>
>>> Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
>>> an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
>>> as well, for Windows at least.
>>> I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
>> I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
>> mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
>> an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
>> advantage matters compared to other issues.
>
> Is a GUI Builder a GUI-based tool for building GUIs? If so what's
> wrong with them? If GUI's are good for anything shouldn't they be good
> for
> making GUIs?
The theme we are developing is that GUI builders are good for nothing.
Well, maybe when learning a new GUI framework they can be used to get
example code. Learning frameworks is a b*tch so that's not nothing.
>
> I've used visual tools to build simple GUIs. It seems preferable to
> counting pixels or drawing dialog boxes on graph paper. Is there a
> third way?
As you said, for simple GUIs. Cue the Ruby fanatic who will happily post
five lines of code but goes AWOL on homework any more interesting
(because his toy starts to look ridiculous on real algorithms).
>
> Can you use lisp to build yourself a GUI specifier that is so
> cool you wouldn't want to touch a GUI Builder with someeone elses
> barge
> pole?
>
>> The good news is that I hear from a lot of people who are happy with
>> CAPI, so you are good to go anyway.
>
http://common-lisp.net/project/cells-gtk/. Celtk and Cello require more
effort.
No pixel specification unless you want to (say for spacing
between/around stuff). Layout calculated for you (unless you love pixel
counting).
kt
····················@hotmail.com writes:
> I've used visual tools to build simple GUIs. It seems preferable to
> counting pixels or drawing dialog boxes on graph paper. Is there a
> third way?
That would be using layout managers.
http://www.zetcode.com/tutorials/gtktutorial/gtklayoutmanagement/
····················@hotmail.com writes:
> On 16 Mar, 00:26, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>
>> > Basically, I'd like to sell Common Lisp to management. LispWorks has
>> > an affordable price tag, but I also need an easy way to integrate GUI
>> > as well, for Windows at least.
>>
>> > I'll check out LispWorks' Interface Builder.
>>
>> I would cross "GUI Builder" off the requirements list. Even if one
>> mistakenly thinks they have an advantage in ease of use over coding up
>> an interface, I doubt one could err so badly in that so as to think the
>> advantage matters compared to other issues.
>
> Is a GUI Builder a GUI-based tool for building GUIs? If so what's
> wrong with them? If GUI's are good for anything shouldn't they be good
> for making GUIs?
That's the point. GUI's are not good for anything.
> I've used visual tools to build simple GUIs. It seems preferable to
> counting pixels or drawing dialog boxes on graph paper. Is there a
> third way?
Yes. Tell the program what data you want to display, and let it do
the "GUI" itself.
Notice how most GRAPHICAL User Interface are not GRAPHICAL at all, but
consist only of text fields, and menus (text "buttons").
GUI builders don't help at all to make a really graphical user interface.
> Can you use lisp to build yourself a GUI specifier that is so
> cool you wouldn't want to touch a GUI Builder with someeone elses
> barge pole?
Yes. It's been done, several times. Unfortunately, people then
translated the builders to other languages, reducing strongly the
interest, and orphaning the lisp code.
>> The good news is that I hear from a lot of people who are happy with
>> CAPI, so you are good to go anyway.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
Elena wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't understand if there is a Common Lisp GUI framework
> (especiallly for Win32), with a GUI designer. I'm not looking for a
> free license, having to shell out some money is OK. Since we can buy
> LispWorks licenses, it should work with a free Lisp or with LispWorks.
>
> Thanks.
Just one thing - The builder is not available for Mac OS X (Not sure
about other systems).
The cool thing about it, is that i generates nice and small
define-interface unlike say .NET's C# or VB's code generation madness.
I have found out another interesting GUI builder: Glade, which is
based upon GTK+. There is also an old package (CL-GLADE) which is a
Glade wrapper.
BTW, I'm also considering Adobe Air. More flashy than everything! It
doesn't allow linking the GUI to native code, so maybe you'll have to
resort to sockets to communicate with the application. Kind of what X
Windows does.
Elena wrote:
> I have found out another interesting GUI builder: Glade, which is
> based upon GTK+. There is also an old package (CL-GLADE) which is a
> Glade wrapper.
Useless! No GUI Builder! Otherwise I would have recommended Cells-Gtk.
One more befuddled newby complaining about a couple of missing bits and
I bet we can get wunderkind Peter Hildebrandt to commit his stuff.
>
> BTW, I'm also considering Adobe Air. More flashy than everything! It
> doesn't allow linking the GUI to native code, so maybe you'll have to
> resort to sockets to communicate with the application. Kind of what X
> Windows does.
And Ltk talking to Tcl/Tk, which Celtk talks to using CFFI. If you want
flash, build Cello, all opengl all the time.
but yeah, openair is an attractive alternative. I did not know about the
socket deal.
kt
On 19 Mar, 01:33, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
> Elena wrote:
> > I have found out another interesting GUI builder: Glade, which is
> > based upon GTK+. There is also an old package (CL-GLADE) which is a
> > Glade wrapper.
>
> Useless! No GUI Builder! Otherwise I would have recommended Cells-Gtk.
I don't understand: Glade *is* a GUI builder. I know that CL-GLADE is
old, therefore I'd have to upgrade the code.
Elena wrote:
> On 19 Mar, 01:33, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>>> I have found out another interesting GUI builder: Glade, which is
>>> based upon GTK+. There is also an old package (CL-GLADE) which is a
>>> Glade wrapper.
>> Useless! No GUI Builder! Otherwise I would have recommended Cells-Gtk.
>
> I don't understand: Glade *is* a GUI builder. I know that CL-GLADE is
> old, therefore I'd have to upgrade the code.
Oh, sorry. I knew *nix people were clueless, I did not know they took it
to that extent. I mean, jeez, they worship an ascii-oriented text editor
and think it is amazing that they even use it to read mail...wouldn't
think a real GUI stood a chance.
kt
Elena escribi�:
> On 19 Mar, 01:33, Kenneth Tilton <·········@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Elena wrote:
>>> I have found out another interesting GUI builder: Glade, which is
>>> based upon GTK+. There is also an old package (CL-GLADE) which is a
>>> Glade wrapper.
>> Useless! No GUI Builder! Otherwise I would have recommended Cells-Gtk.
>
> I don't understand: Glade *is* a GUI builder. I know that CL-GLADE is
> old, therefore I'd have to upgrade the code.
You could use clg (http://sourceforge.net/projects/clg). It can (at
least last time I looked at it) load Glade XML files and realize the GUI.
Leandro