net@tub.UUCP (Oliver Laumann) (01/08/90)
In article <4585@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM> mayer@hplabs.hp.com (Niels Mayer) writes: > > The Elk approach is more of a 1-to-1 correspondence to the Xtoolkit > intrinsics calls, and is similar to my initial proof-of-concept "alpha" > WINTERP that I hacked together out of ELI and the HP Xwidgets about a year > ago. I found my "alpha" approach to be workable, but still a bit too > verbose. Since we are using Elk-Scheme as the extension language for a `real' software package (an ODA-based document processing system), we do need to be able to access the full power of the X toolkit, for instance, our application must be able to open more than one display (for shared editing of a document). Of course, funtionality like opening a display and creating an application context (the things that you called `noise') can be hidden in an additional `layer' if desired; building abstractions is one of the things that can be done in Scheme quite elegantly (which is one reason why we think that Scheme is better suited as a general extension language than, for instance, Xlisp). [Since this has no longer anything to do with NeWS, I have directed follow-ups to comp.windows.x] Regards, -- Oliver Laumann net@TUB.BITNET net@tub.UUCP