bill@polygen.uucp (Bill Poitras) (01/21/91)
In article <1991Jan14.211226.17872@isc.rit.edu> cms2839@isc.rit.edu (C.M. Stuntz ) writes: > > XVT ( eXtensible Virtual Toolkit ) from >GSS , will allow you to use a single source code that is protable [stuff deleted] > i've not used any of them , so i can't >attest to their worth . i only know what they claim to do . Can any one out there attest to their worth? Has anyone had any experience with XVT? I would like to know any problems with XVT to see if I can use it for cross platform development. E-mail or post is fine. I will try to summarize what responces I get by e-mail. +-----------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Bill Poitras | Polygen Corporation | {princeton mit-eddie | | (bill) | Waltham, MA USA | bu sunne}!polygen!bill | | | | bill@polygen.com | +-----------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
my@dtg.nsc.com (Michael Yip) (01/23/91)
In article Bill Poitras writes: >In article C.M. Stuntz writes: >> >> XVT ( eXtensible Virtual Toolkit ) from >>GSS , will allow you to use a single source code that is protable >[stuff deleted] >> i've not used any of them , so i can't >>attest to their worth . i only know what they claim to do . >Can any one out there attest to their worth? Has anyone had any >experience with XVT? I would like to know any problems with XVT to see >if I can use it for cross platform development. E-mail or post is fine. >I will try to summarize what responces I get by e-mail. I have not use the XVT development system at all, but I read somewhere that the XVT Toolkit only provides an union of the X, Win3 and the MAC capabilities. That is good and bad. If that is true, then the XVT Tool Kit only provide a subset of each window enviornment and not all the functions. It is good, on the other hand, that you have one program source and it works on all environments. Well, that's my 2 cents. -- Mike my@berlioz.nsc.com
eric@eecg.toronto.edu (Eric Smith) (01/23/91)
In article <957@redford.UUCP> bill@redford.UUCP (Bill Poitras(X258)) writes: >In article <1991Jan14.211226.17872@isc.rit.edu> cms2839@isc.rit.edu (C.M. Stuntz ) writes: >> >> XVT ( eXtensible Virtual Toolkit ) from >>GSS , will allow you to use a single source code that is protable >[stuff deleted] >> >Can any one out there attest to their worth? Has anyone had any >experience with XVT? I would like to know any problems with XVT to see >if I can use it for cross platform development. Well, I have had the wonderful experience of working with XVT in a project for one of our clients, who wanted a system which would run on both Macintosh and Windows. Since I was familiar with CommonView, we decided that it would be safest to go with XVT :-). XVT does a good job of getting things started, since the API is simpler than that of either Mac or Windows. However, the simpler API does mean that some user interface features are unsupported (e.g. Mac-style popup menus, Windows 3-style combo-boxes, Windows/PM-style DDE), and a number of other features are available, but with reduced functionality (e.g. edit controls on dialogs are restricted to 255 characters, list boxes can only be on dialog windows, and fonts are handled in a minimal way). However, overall, XVT has done a good job of choosing a core set of features. The implementation, particularly in the Windows version, I found to be somewhat less solid than the concept. Three months into our project we had a functional, but not complete version of our program. The next six months were spent trying to get XVT to work the way we wanted it to on both platforms. The main areas of difficulty were dialogs (which are a royal pain), printing (also a pain, but that's true for both Mac and Windows as well), and lists (both list boxes and slists, which are XVT's version of singly-linked lists). I would recommend XVT for someone who wants to create prototypes on multiple platforms, but not for anyone who is trying to write commercial or commercial-quality software... XVT leaves just too many rough edges. In retrospect, our project would have been more efficiently completed if we had written the two versions in the native APIs instead of using XVT. Hope this helps, Eric Smith Generic Design Systems Corporation (416) 236-0908 1199 Islington Ave. eric@eecg.toronto.edu Etobicoke, Ont. CompuServe: 72371,3015 M8Z 4T2 GEnie: E.SMITH29
rjf@canon.co.uk (Robin Faichney) (01/23/91)
In article <630@dtg.nsc.com> my@berlioz.UUCP (Michael Yip) writes: > > I have not use the XVT development system at all, but I read >somewhere that the XVT Toolkit only provides an union of the X, Win3 >and the MAC capabilities. Haven't used XVT but attended a conference where Marc Rochkind presented a paper on it. I believe that you have full access to the underlying system -- which obviously compromises your portability, but could be worth it..?
MADJK@ROHVM1.BITNET (John G Kinker) (01/25/91)
When did the cited project using XVT for Windows and Mac occur? What version/ release of XVT was used?
weimer@garden.kodak.COM (Gary Weimer (588-0953)) (01/25/91)
In article <630@dtg.nsc.com> you write: |> |> I have not use the XVT development system at all, but I read |> somewhere that the XVT Toolkit only provides an union of the X, Win3 ^^^^^ ^^^^^ |> and the MAC capabilities. That is good and bad. If that is true, |> then the XVT Tool Kit only provide a subset of each window enviornment |> and not all the functions. It is good, on the other hand, that you have |> one program source and it works on all environments. Actually, it's intersection. MAC only has one button on the mouse, therefore, XVT only supports one mouse button, etc.
eric@eecg.toronto.edu (Eric Smith) (01/26/91)
In article <91024.131349MADJK@ROHVM1.BITNET> MADJK@ROHVM1.BITNET (John G Kinker) writes: >When did the cited project using XVT for Windows and Mac occur? What version/ >release of XVT was used? It took place between April 1990 and January 11th 1991. We started with XVT/Win 2.0, and went through various betas up to version 2.02. The Mac versions used were 2.0 and 2.1. Eric Smith