Re: [Caml-list] Does LablTk have a future?

[Matt Gushee <mgushee@havenrock.com>]

Jon Harrop wrote:

>>Specific in what sense? And do you mean LablTk as a tool, or as a book
>>topic?

> I meant that the topic "GUI programming using lablTK" is too specific for a 
> book.

Okay, I thought that was probably what you meant. And you're probably right.

>>Ever used the Canvas or Text widgets? There's a lot going on there.
> 
> I'm using the Text widget in a very simple way. I may have to start using the 
> canvas widget because I can't figure out how to do various things (e.g. a 
> spreadsheet).

Yes, using Text for a spreadsheet is pushing the envelope quite a bit. 
It's certainly possible with Canvas. The other option would be to have a 
bunch of Text or Entry widgets laid out with the Grid geometry manager.

> Yes. As OCaml gains popularity it will be commercially viable to publish 
> cheaper books. In the mean time, if you're interested in making money, 
> perhaps educational software would be better?

Okay, you've got my attention. I've had vague thoughts in that direction 
myself, and it happens that I taught English as a Second Language for a 
few years before getting into geekery. What thoughts do you have about 
the opportunities in that field?

> Incidentally, OpenGL is extremely important for us. So a GUI toolkit must be 
> able to handle OpenGL widgets. Indeed, this begs the question: why not do the 
> whole thing in OpenGL?

It might be a good idea. My starting point was enlightened 
self-interest: I know Tk and LablTk fairly well, and I perceive that 
LablTk needs some help if it is to remain (become?) useful. Whereas I'm 
almost totally ignorant of OpenGL. It's one of the many things I think I 
ought to learn, but haven't found time.

--
Matt Gushee
Englewood, CO, USA