SWT and AWT

Wed Dec 3 01:53:00 GMT 2003

On Nov 25, 2003, at 8:22 AM, chris burdess wrote:
> frankly i think this is all a bit of a non sequitur. swt was designed 
> as
> a replacement for awt, and its design goals are different. and just
> using it as a bridge doesn't resolve the licensing issues regarding
> linking to mfc/cocoa. if it's possible to resolve those issues, we
> should write proper mfc and cocoa awt implementations.

There arn't any licensing issues with cocoa afaik, since its part of 
the OS. In any case, cocoa and MFC are high-level APIs much like AWT 
itself. Its probably better to use lower-level APIs to implement AWT, 
both for efficiency and because its probably necessary in order to 
implement AWT accurately. On Mac OS X, the right API would be 
HIToolbox, which is an object orientated C API, somewhat similar to 
GTK.
Regards
Bryce.