Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:26:06 +0200 (MEST)
From: Henri Dubois-Ferriere <henridf at lcavsun1.epfl.ch>
Reply-To: Henri DF <henri.dubois-ferriere at epfl.ch>
To: caml-list at inria.fr
Cc: lablgtk at kaba.or.jp
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] labltk vs lablgtk
In-Reply-To: <20030410134119.A95310 at chronis.pobox.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0304102108010.5571-100000 at lcavsun10.epfl.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

thanks for all this valuable info.

one further question: is there an easy way to add file descriptor events
into lablgtk's event loop like with labltk?
i looked around but didn't find any examples/documentation of
this anywhere.

thanks

henri

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, scott wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 11:18:26AM -0600, Matt Gushee wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 04:00:58PM +0200, Henri Dubois-Ferriere wrote:
> > >
> > > But since I'm going to live with this choice for quite a while, i'm
> > > wondering what are the broad pros/cons between labltk and lablgtk?
> > > does anything stick out as being specific to one or the other?
> >
> > Let's see ...
> >
> [...]
>
> > * (My impression is that) GTK has good Unicode support. Tk has had issues
> >   with i18n for some time. The latest versions may be up to par, but I'm
> >   not sure. Probably either would be fine for Western European
> >   languages; the problems I have heard of were mostly related to
> CJKV.
>
> The new gtk (2) has good unicode support.  I'm not sure how that's
> addressed in lablgtk (2).  Tk works with unicode, but labltk does
> not.  It is possible to hack labltk to do this, but it's _very_ ugly
> (trust me I've done it)
>
> scott
>
> -------------------
> To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
>