Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!torn!nott!cunews!tina.mrco.carleton.ca!knight
From: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Subject: Re: Why is VisualWorks SO complicated?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tina.mrco.carleton.ca
Message-ID: <knight.821283384@tina.mrco.carleton.ca>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Organization: The Object People
References: <DKM6EJ.L59@cunews.carleton.ca> <4cfl1p$d36@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <knight.821159356@tina.mrco.carleton.ca> <4d05me$fo1@cloner2.ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 14:16:24 GMT
Lines: 25

In <4d05me$fo1@cloner2.ix.netcom.com> lovejoya@ix.netcom.com(Alan Lovejoy ) writes:
... re: native widgets and emulation...

>Why can't we have it both ways?  Why not have both native widget
>bindings and have pure Smalltalk widgetry?  That way, you could use
>whatever suited your fancy or best met your requirements.  Unless
>I'm missing something, the two options are in no way mutually
>exclusive!

This is certainly true. IBM uses native widgets when they're
available, but emulates them when they're missing on a particular
platform. In fact, I believe that this is the plan for the merged PPD
release. Native widgets will probably appear first for Windows, with
others being emulated, and I expect it would be possible to use either
emulated or native on platforms that support both (and with SLL's it
doesn't even take any extra space). However, I would suspect that in
time it would stop being worthwhile maintaining the emulations if
they're not adding significant value.

-- 
 Alan Knight                | The Object People
 knight@acm.org             | Smalltalk and OO Training and Consulting
 alan@objectpeople.on.ca    | 509-885 Meadowlands Dr.
 +1 613 225 8812            | Ottawa, Canada, K2C 3N2

