young@ssiwest.UUCP (indi) (11/29/90)
Has anyone had the opportunity to work with both AT&T's Xt+ toolkit and Sun's OLIT toolkit? (Both api's produce OPEN LOOK style windows.) If so, are there any significant differences between the two? In particular are there any problems running a program with AT&T's Xt+ that was developed using Sun's OLIT? Any problems the other way around? ___________________________________________________________ indi (Cathy Young) Supercomputer Systems, Inc uunet!ssi!young 2021 Las Positas Court, Suite 101 (415)373-8044 Livermore, CA 94550 "Besides, God isn't dead; he's in your head, right where he ought to be!" -Devo
cflatter@ZIA.AOC.NRAO.EDU (Chris Flatters) (11/29/90)
Has anyone had the opportunity to work with both AT&T's Xt+ toolkit and Sun's OLIT toolkit? (Both api's produce OPEN LOOK style windows.) If so, are there any significant differences between the two? I believe that OLIT is Xt+, modified by Sun for X11R4. In particular are there any problems running a program with AT&T's Xt+ that was developed using Sun's OLIT? Any problems the other way around? I compiled the examples from John Miller's "An OPEN LOOK at UNIX" with only one problem (if you don't count getting the source off the 5-1/4 inch floppy fixed in the back cover): one of the files was missing a header. I would be surprised if there were any really significant problems in going between the two. Chris Flatters
wolf@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.wolf) (11/29/90)
From article <9011290334.AA06617@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>, by cflatter@ZIA.AOC.NRAO.EDU (Chris Flatters): > > Has anyone had the opportunity to work with both AT&T's Xt+ > toolkit and Sun's OLIT toolkit? (Both api's produce OPEN LOOK > style windows.) If so, are there any significant differences > between the two? > > I believe that OLIT is Xt+, modified by Sun for X11R4. > > > In particular are there any problems running a program with > AT&T's Xt+ that was developed using Sun's OLIT? Any problems > the other way around? > > I compiled the examples from John Miller's "An OPEN LOOK at UNIX" with > only one problem (if you don't count getting the source off the 5-1/4 > inch floppy fixed in the back cover): one of the files was missing a header. > I would be surprised if there were any really significant problems in > going between the two. > > Chris Flatters The two seem to be fairly compatible, but I noticed a couple "bothersome" differences: (1) The setting of window attribute properties is different; applications that attempt to set window decorations the "Xt+ way", may not function fully under the OW2.0 window manager. Also, the Xt+ toolkit defines a field in the OlWinAttr structure (Xol/OlClients.h) that, for some reason, is commented out in the OLIT version. If you have an application that uses this field, it won't compile. Tom -- +-------------------------------------+ "Stupid" questions are better than | Thomas Wolf | (201) 615-4789 | no questions at all. No answer is | Bell Labs, NJ | wolf@mink.att.com | better than a stupid one. +-------------------------------------+
grp@Unify.com (Greg Pasquariello) (11/30/90)
In article <9011282223.AA10287@ssiwest.ssiwest.com>, young@ssiwest.UUCP (indi) writes: > From: young@ssiwest.UUCP (indi) > Subject: Comparing OLIT and Xt+ > Date: 28 Nov 90 22:23:43 GMT > Organization: The Internet > > > > Has anyone had the opportunity to work with both AT&T's Xt+ > toolkit and Sun's OLIT toolkit? (Both api's produce OPEN LOOK > style windows.) Yes. > If so, are there any significant differences > between the two? > No. > In particular are there any problems running a program with > AT&T's Xt+ that was developed using Sun's OLIT? Any problems > the other way around? Haven't tried this, but it should be OK. You might have problems if you do any direct Window Manager manipulation, because the two libraries handle things _slightly_ differently. > > > ___________________________________________________________ > indi (Cathy Young) Supercomputer Systems, Inc -- --- Greg Pasquariello Unify Corporation grp@Unify.Com
mls@cbnewsm.att.com (mike.siemon) (12/04/90)
In article <9011290334.AA06617@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>, cflatter@ZIA.AOC.NRAO.EDU (Chris Flatters) writes: > I believe that OLIT is Xt+, modified by Sun for X11R4. The OLIT code is the Xt+ code from release 2, modified at USL for X11R4 -- done last spring as the first stage in implementation of the new release 4 (to be generally available in mid-Dec). It was *after* we ported to the R4 server that we started to add new functionality (3D, mouseless operation,...) -- I suppose that these later changes will also become available with some future update to OpenWindows. I understand there *were* a few porting changes to fit the code with SunOS and with OpenWindows generally, but substantially OLIT *is* the USL code. > I compiled the examples from John Miller's "An OPEN LOOK at UNIX" with > only one problem (if you don't count getting the source off the 5-1/4 > inch floppy fixed in the back cover): one of the files was missing a header. > I would be surprised if there were any really significant problems in Oddly enough, I got the same error using the latest XWIN and Xt+, the scrollbar example was missing a definition of XtNtitle, which requires including Shell.h; I presume this is related to header differences from the R3-to-R4 change. Anyway, I recommend Miller's book for a quick start in OPEN LOOK widgetry. If anyone needs the reference, it is published by M&T Books, Redwood City, CA, 1990; ISBN 1-55851-058-3 (for the book/disk combination Chris mentions; the book and the disk are also available separately (~057-5 for the book, ~059-1 for the disk). -- Michael L. Siemon In so far as people think they can see the m.siemon@ATT.COM "limits of human understanding", they think ...!att!sfsup!mls of course that they can see beyond these. standard disclaimer -- Ludwig Wittgenstein