Baby X - new project

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Malcolm McLean, Jul 25, 2013.

  1. I've got some time, so I decided to dust off Baby X, a project I worked on a few years back.
    Baby X is a "baby" X windows toolkit. It's designed to offer all the
    usual features - menus, buttons, popups, scrollbars, edit boxes and the
    like, but implemented in a way that is simple - simple to use, simple to
    compile, simple to hack into to rewrite or extend. Of course that means pure
    C bindings, no C++ class hierarchies, compiler front ends, etc. Just drop the
    files into your source directory and type gcc *.c -lX11, and you have all
    the functionality.
    Given the basic concept of a "baby" toolkit, what design principles would
    people like to see?
     
    Malcolm McLean, Jul 25, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Is that not pretty much what Xaw does?
     
    Johann Klammer, Jul 25, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. With something like a toolkit there'll be competitors. But Xaw grabs the main
    event loop, for example, which means that it's hard to mix and match with
    other code. Baby X won't do this.
     
    Malcolm McLean, Jul 25, 2013
    #3
  4. Back to the 80s then.
     
    Jens Stuckelberger, Jul 25, 2013
    #4
  5. Malcolm McLean

    Fred K Guest

    Neither Xaw or Motif grabs the main event loop. Your application does that by calling XtAppMainLoop().

    You do have to do that - youy can process the events yourself:

    XEvent event;

    for (;;) {
    XtAppNextEvent(app, &event);
    /* do whatever you want with the event here */
    }
     
    Fred K, Jul 25, 2013
    #5
  6. Malcolm McLean

    Fred K Guest

    Arrgh! Hate GOOGLE GROPUPS.
    That was supposed to say "You do not have to do that."
     
    Fred K, Jul 25, 2013
    #6
  7. Malcolm McLean

    James Kuyper Guest

    On 07/25/2013 03:22 PM, Fred K wrote:
    ....
    a) get a proper news reader. Mozilla Thunderbird is my personal
    favorite, available for a wide variety of platforms, and is free.

    b) sign up for access to a proper news server. I use Eternal
    September,<http://www.eternal-september.org>, which seems to provide
    good coverage, decent spam filtering, and is also free.

    c) configure your news reader to connect to your news server.

    You now have something that almost certainly works much better than
    Google Groups. It's hard, but feasible, to serve news more poorly than
    Google Groups does.
     
    James Kuyper, Jul 25, 2013
    #7
  8. [OT] Apart from its archive Google Groups has one big advantage over your
    solution: it can be accessed from any PC with a web browser. So a user can
    access the same account from work, from any PC at home and from an internet
    cafe or friend's house while travelling, all with the same client settings
    (as the Usenet client is the Google service). No one else I have found
    offers the same for free.

    For that reason I stuck with Google Groups for a long time until recently.
    Unfortunately their new interface is abysmal and it finally pushed me over
    the edge(!) I've long had an Eternal September account for reading Usenet.
    Now I use it for posting too and have just to accept the fact that the
    newsreader client software is present on just one PC. I still miss the
    webability of Google but, for now, between the two evils this seems the
    lesser of the two.

    James
     
    James Harris \(es\), Jul 25, 2013
    #8
  9. I use Gnus (which runs under Emacs) under a "screen" session. I can ssh
    into the system where I'm running it from anywhere (as long as an ssh
    client is available) and reconnect to my screen session.

    There are other text-based newsreaders out there if you don't like Emacs
    or Gnus, and tmux is a popular alternative to screen.
     
    Keith Thompson, Jul 25, 2013
    #9
  10. Malcolm McLean

    BartC Guest

    I know nothing about X (but there's a possibility I will need to use it in
    the near future)

    What exactly does a toolkit for X do, and why would you need a baby one?
    What's wrong with talking to X directly? (Assuming a toolkit is something
    that might sit between your application, and X. If not, then my
    understanding is even less than I thought...)
     
    BartC, Jul 25, 2013
    #10
  11. xlib is the low-level interface to the X server. The X server can be thought
    of as an abstract graphical device. xlib provides routines to open windows,
    draw text and a few graphics primitives on them, and get keyboard presses
    and mouse clicks.
    However most programmers want graphical items like buttons, edit boxes,
    message boxes. There's no "create button" function in xlib. You have to
    open a window, draw the button on it, and intercept the mouse click
    yourself. So obviously, there's a demand for libraries which provide
    buttons. A toolkit is such a library.
    There are problems with all toolkits. Qt is a nice, professionally developed
    one. But it's written in C++, and the designers decided that even C++ didn't
    provide all the functionality they needed. So they wrote a front end to
    C++, and all source files that call Qt functions have to be passed through
    that front end. It means that no-one can compile a Qt program unless he
    has the Qt tools installed.
    Baby X is a "baby" toolkit. It doesn't do anything fancy, just puts up
    widgets in response to normal C calls. It;s going to be provided as source
    files rather than a library. So you can drop the Baby X files into your
    project directory, and the whole thing should compile with gcc *.c -lX11
    It's swings and roundabouts. Qt couldn't do the same and still provide the
    signal/slot mechanism.
     
    Malcolm McLean, Jul 25, 2013
    #11
  12. Malcolm McLean

    James Kuyper Guest

    I have to agree with you about that. Google Groups is an awful way to
    search for old usenet messages, but it's far better than any
    alternatives that I'm aware of. "awful" and "far better" is a very
    annoying combination.
    I don't think there's many PCs with web browsers that Mozilla
    Thunderbird couldn't be installed on - except by reason of company
    policies that prohibit it.
    It would be nice to keep my settings synchronized between Thunderbird
    sessions running on multiple different systems. Mozilla FireFox allows
    that with bookmarks and browsing history, which I've found very
    convenient. I wonder when they'll get around to implementing such a
    feature for Thunderbird.

    However, the single thing I'd most like to synchronize is the list of
    newsgroup messages that I've already viewed with Thunderbird. As far as
    I know, Google Groups doesn't even keep track of that, much less let me
    synchronize it across multiple systems.
     
    James Kuyper, Jul 25, 2013
    #12
  13. Malcolm McLean

    Lew Pitcher Guest

    X11's API is quite primitive; it really only provides the ability to define
    and fill drawing areas (called "windows"), and to read information from
    mouse and keyboard. Writing GUI programs with this protocol would be a real
    headache.

    Various "toolkits" (including Xlib, for one) provide APIs that consolidate
    window definition and drawing functions into specialized calls, so that the
    programmer can code simple calls to draw a "button" or a "text box" or
    a "menu", rather than the complex X11 protocol calls that make up these
    things.

    Other toolkits (like QT or GTK++) abstract the drawing functions even
    further, giving the programmer less control over the resulting graphics,
    and more control over the abstract entities ("checkboxes", "radio
    buttons", "backgrounds", "borders", "handles", etc) that the GUI
    application may use

    It sounds like Malcolm has written something on the level of Xlib rather
    than something on the level of GTK++
     
    Lew Pitcher, Jul 25, 2013
    #13
  14. Malcolm McLean

    James Kuyper Guest

    He covered that, though not in detail, in his original message. He wants
    something that's simpler to use than the alternatives he's familiar
    with. In order to convert that into a solid design, he's going to have
    to convert the vague term "simple" into a precise list of the
    complexities he wants to avoid. Every complexity in the normal methods
    of using X corresponds to one or more obscure features of X; to keep his
    toolkit simple, he's going to have to leave corresponding features of X
    unsupported. He won't be able to make much progress until he's
    identified which ones he's willing to drop.
     
    James Kuyper, Jul 25, 2013
    #14
  15. Yes, and while many Usenet providers retain posts going back weeks or months
    Google have a truly great archive going back many years (having bought out
    Deja News, IIRC).

    One thing I did notice before switching to a more conventional system is
    that the new Google interface seemed to allow replies to older posts than
    they did previously. That could be handy in some cases.

    ....
    Agreed. That would be a big help. The old GG interface 'cauught up' a group
    if it was viewed. The new one, IIRC, does that at the thread level - i.e. if
    you read one message in a thread it will mark the thread as read. In that
    sense it's better than the old one but that doesn't begin to compensate for
    the other losses. And it still doesn't allow marking as read individual
    messages.

    James
     
    James Harris \(es\), Jul 25, 2013
    #15
  16. Malcolm McLean

    Melzzzzz Guest

    Not really true. I have written project that didn't use signal/slot
    mechanism that qt provides, rather override function that provides
    a way to implement own event handling mechanism.
    In order to compile one don't need qt tools because qt use
    macros.

    I would be interrested in your project as I like to write assembler and
    gtk is pain to use with assembler (heavy usage of macros).
    Any c++ toolkit is useless with assembler client program.
     
    Melzzzzz, Jul 26, 2013
    #16
  17. Malcolm McLean

    Fred K Guest

    Unfortunately I do this fromwork,and my employer does not allow
    downloads to company computers, even i9f they are free.
     
    Fred K, Jul 26, 2013
    #17
  18. Malcolm McLean

    Les Cargill Guest


    Then your employer knows what they want, and deserves to get it good and
    hard*.

    *paraphrasing Mencken.


    Iron Mountain provides escrow services; that may be able to be
    used to "launder" the open-sourceness of things. I don't know if it
    will work in your case or not.
     
    Les Cargill, Jul 26, 2013
    #18
  19. Malcolm McLean

    Siri Cruise Guest

    A window manager is a widget that can write to the entire screen and receives
    events from the operating system.

    A widget is a process that can write to the portion of a screen and receives
    events from a superwidget. It contains zero or more subwidgets which can receive
    events from the widget and write portions of the screens contained in the widget.

    That would mean a widget library would
    (1) Have a way to receive events.
    (2) A way to create/send events.
    (3) A way to draw a pixel on the screen.
    (4) A way to get information about the widget.

    You could make that the BabyX interface.

    The user can then define their own libraries which add this set or that set of
    events to a widget, and/or create more elaborate drawers in terms of simpler
    drawers.

    Once you can draw individual pixels, you can use that implement a quadratic
    (Quickdraw), cubic (Postscript), OpenGL, etc. And of course the libraries could
    also use hardware shortcuts if they can find them.

    And then define more libraries which use those libraries, and so on.
     
    Siri Cruise, Jul 26, 2013
    #19
  20. According to what you wrote, especially in combination with
    it sounds as if your "Baby X" will only do the drawing of the
    widgets. As far as I can see without "grabbing" the event queue
    it won't be able to react reliably to e.g. mouse clicks on but-
    tons etc. So it would seem that the user will have to deal with
    the pletora of events all by him/herself. I guess that could be
    a show-stopper for most people since you then need to under-
    stand the Xlib in all the gory details. Or am I missing some-
    thing?

    BTW, feel free to have a look at XForms (the X toolkit, not
    the XML XForms format stuff, they stole the name:) - it's a
    relatively simple toolkit in C only, not a "baby" but more
    of a "teenager" in comparison to e.g. Qt:) Don't expect too
    much - while I am the current maintainer there are lots of
    things I'm not happy with (and, since it's such an old toolkit,
    are hard to change without breaking too many applications).

    Regards, Jens
     
    Jens Thoms Toerring, Jul 26, 2013
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.