@steril06

Sorry, but MUI isn't outdated at all API-wise, but maybe you didn't understand how it works. :)

Your same example could be written like that with MUI (no checking, since there wasn't in your example, and no silly fixed size coordinates stuff either, even if it's possible):

Object *button = SimpleButton("button");
Object *win = WindowObject,
WindowContents,
VGroup,
Child, button,
End,
End;

DoMethod(button, MUIM_Notify, MUIA_Pressed, FALSE, app, 1, MUIM_DoSomething);


Or, if we add the button dynamically:

Object *group = VGroup, End;
Object *win = WindowObject, WindowContents, group, End;
Object *button = SimpleButton("button");

DoMethod(button, MUIM_Notify, MUIA_Pressed, FALSE, app, 1, MUIM_DoSomething);

DoMethod(group, MUIM_InitChange);
DoMethod(group, OM_ADDMEMBER, button);
DoMethod(group, MUIM_ExitChange);

Last edited by Fab on 08-Jan-2010 at 01:25 AM.

Yes, I know Feelin, its very nice and I know that NTUI is very similar to it. However, there are some differences in detail. But we are all doing this for fun and personal education here, right? If I would run a company and time is money, I would use Feelin. (em, I would probably not code for AmigaOS at all...)

_________________
--
Author of
HD-Rec, Sweeper, Samplemanager, ArTKanoid, Monkeyscript, Toadies, AsteroidsTR, TuiTED, PosTED, TKPlayer, AudioConverter, ScreenCam, PerlinFX, MapEdit, AB3 Includes and many more...
Homepage: http://www.hd-rec.de

@Wanderer && Samurai_Crow

These XML GUI structures are good for none programmers but if i as a developer want's to create his own custom component etc,this is not posible with a XML only approach.

_________________
_________________________________________________
--Regards Muffin
--Amiga a Brave New World!

@Wanderer:

Sorry, if I confused you... my little code example was not meant to describe MUI (which I abhore), but the way modern OOP languages like Actionscript 3 and C# do GUI-building. You can hardly call that outdated.

I have to admit that, given your example, Flex (which looks similar to your stuff here) works quite fine, but even there I prefer doing stuff on pixel and not on autolayouting.

And on the topic of "pixelcounting", you are right that it sometimes takes a little bit time. Auto-layouters often produce weird looking GUIs though , look at MUI and Java for that. Getting something useful out of a auto layouter takes sometimes as much time as setting stuff pixel by pixel.

For me the best would be using some kind of resource editor for setting GUI-Elements, like the one on FlexBuilder and Visual Studio and the like..

At the end though, it's probably what you prefer or not.

I have more detailed look on it today, and must to say, that is one of not so many professional sites/apps/libs. It feels like ppls know what they do. On-line documentation looks modern and standard (in today terms), site itself pretty simply, but informative and good looking for eyes, and the tools (framework and tool chain) have big potential for future.

Many of amigans can check how need to work, before starting to making crappy html pages with black background and some boring gifs :)

Keep up the good work, hope to try it soon (when GUI classes will be implemented, etc).

Last edited by kas1e on 08-Jan-2010 at 09:31 PM.

_________________
Join us to improve dopus5!
zerohero's mirror of os4/os3 crosscompiler suites

> These XML GUI structures are good for none programmers but if i as a developer want's to create his own custom component etc,this is not posible with a XML only approach.
Even XML approach allows you custom views, e.g. like the Arranger/SampleEditor/MIDI Notator Windows in HD-Rec. (if this is what you meant)



Of course, for very specific needs, ntui (and I guess also Feeling) allows you creating a GUI by function calls, e.g. if you need callback hooks in a TextEditor Widget (which is very rare). The XML is just an option that makes things faster and more safe, plus doing it in a semi-Wysiwig Editor.

@Steril
"Pixelcounting" is a horrible thing and seems to be easier only to unexperienced people, because it seems to be more straight forward and to put more control into your hands. However, pixelcounting is a heavy burden to the developer, and it ends up in static, non-customizable GUIs. This is fine for skinned GUIs, like WinAMP, but not for real Application GUIs. (BTW, did I meantion that NTUI supports both, pixel layout (for games and skinned things) and autolayout ? ;))

> Getting something useful out of a auto layouter takes sometimes as much time as setting stuff pixel by pixel.
Simply no. It is way faster and the result is by principle

1. consistent
2. user controlable
3. resizable
4. Resolution/Fontsize etc. independent

Pixelcounting however, is not, by principle (unless you "simulate" an autolayouter afterwars). Ok, you can use logical Pixels, but this ends up in the crap Visual Studio is doing. The GUI builder is only usable for very basic stuff, but as soon as there are higher demands that having "just something that works", you need to write it via code anyway.

_________________
--
Author of
HD-Rec, Sweeper, Samplemanager, ArTKanoid, Monkeyscript, Toadies, AsteroidsTR, TuiTED, PosTED, TKPlayer, AudioConverter, ScreenCam, PerlinFX, MapEdit, AB3 Includes and many more...
Homepage: http://www.hd-rec.de

> , but the way modern OOP languages like Actionscript 3 and C# do GUI-building. You can hardly call that outdated.
OOP is not outdated, but pixelcounting *should* be outdated. It does not conflict with autolayout, it is just the layer below autolayout, and in combination with a WYSIWIG builder it is an easy tool for beginners to set up a GUI. But I think there is plenty of auto-layout stuff for C# out there...

Last edited by Wanderer on 09-Jan-2010 at 06:40 PM.

_________________
--
Author of
HD-Rec, Sweeper, Samplemanager, ArTKanoid, Monkeyscript, Toadies, AsteroidsTR, TuiTED, PosTED, TKPlayer, AudioConverter, ScreenCam, PerlinFX, MapEdit, AB3 Includes and many more...
Homepage: http://www.hd-rec.de

I think it would be better idea to port Qt to AmigaOS 4. It would be much better idean than creating co0mpletely new framework which is similar to Qt but still incompatible with it. If Qt would be available for the Amiga the it would be easy to support amiga too. It would also make it much more easier to port stuff to AmigaOS 4.

I know that porting Qt to Amiga OS4 would not be easy, but it's not easy to create completely new framework either..

Is there any progress update to this project ?

_________________
Download 499.26 Mbps, 659.94 Mbps Upload :)