[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [teskridg@NMSU.Edu: future MCL]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: [teskridg@NMSU.Edu: future MCL]
- From: cfry@MIT.EDU (Christopher Fry)
- Date: Thu, 07 May 92 14:30:09 EST
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, York@Chuck-Jones.West.Dialnet.ILA.COM
> From: Vincent Keunen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I'm using CLIM and very satisfied. I am often surprised by how much it
> does. It's the kind of software that impresses me very much. Also,
> it's very deep.
> Some of its features are:
> - a very strong link between application objects and their visual
> appearance on the screen (you don't know how useful this is until you've
> used it, but after, you can't live without it)
> - presentation types for easy and modular input/output
> - abstractions for interfaces (text styles, inks,...) independant of
> the host but linked to what the programmer really wants (cf emphasizing
> rather than writing in bold, cf +flipping-ink+...)
> - good drawing capabilities (with COLOR)
> - AUTOMATIC INCREMENTAL REDISPLAY
> - command management (a good abstraction for all user actions, for all
> kinds of actions,... predefined input editor,...)
> - high level output capabilities (automatic table and graph generation)
> - integrated help system
> - low level features like pointer manipulation,...
> - output to postscript stream (means the postscript code is
> automatically generated if you write to these kinds of streams)
> Some of the things missing, to my point of view are "undo" capabilities
> (as in GINA), more close to the host look and feel (but I suppose it's
> the goal of CLIM 2, which I have not seen yet).
> More globally, CLIM seems pretty clean and well designed to me. Also,
> the specs for CLIM 2 clearly define the protocols to the differents
> layers of CLIM for easy programmer access and I like that.
This is the best report on CLIM that I've seen yet. Permit me to probe a little deeper.
You are speaking of CLIM1 running on MCL, right?
Is all of the functionality that you describe in the Symbolics "CLIM Release 1.0"
manual, March 1991? If there is significant additional documentation, please let me know
Are you familiar with the MCL2 window system?
Other than a Mac-look what other features are in MCL window system that are not easily
done in CLIM 1?
If you were NOT planning on porting your code to a non-mac, would you prefer
CLIM 1 over MCL windows? & why.
My appliction needs multiply nested views, each of which may be independently scrolled.
Can CLIM 1 support this?
Is CLIM1 on a Mac significantly slower than MCL windows?
Have you used Quicktime with CLIM1? I'm thinking of showing a videoclip inside
a pane in a window and am wondering if this is going to be much harder in
CLIM than MCL windows.