Hello,
I'm a new fltk user and I'm using it with opengl. I like using FLUID.
A general question: are there any disadvantages using FLUID as opposed to hand-coding? If I run across any tricky problems when using FLUID will I have to do nasty work-arounds because code is generated? Or does FLUID have enough facilities for hand-coding that it provides no restrictions?

Ray

Hi Ray. Welcome to GIDForums™.

Good question about fluid. A few weeks ago, my response would have been to use fluid only for the initial layout and then hand code everything else. But now I think a little differenlty. Cable_guy has posted a great tutorial on how to use fluid in a much better manner. (see here) After seeing this, it seems much more likely that you can get fluid to generate the code in the manner that you want.

That being said, I think it is still probably a personal preference. I like to use fluid for the rudimentary layout and then hand code everything. It is one of the things I really like about fltk. It is so straight forward that it can easily be done by hand.

What kind of things are you working on? I have never done much with opengl and I would love to hear what you are doing.

__________________
The best damn Sports Blog period.

Hello and welcome Ray. Are you using 1.1.5 or 2.0? I don't think this matters I am just curious.

As far as hand coding vs. fluid generated coding I can give you my take. If you look through the tutorial (FLTK && fluid In Motion) you will see that you can do your hand coding in fluid. That was done with 1.1.5. It is really just a matter of using the fluid new/code function/method and new/code/code or /code block. Fluid will place your code and you will not have to use your editor. A good example of using both methods would be the mentioned tutorial and dsmith's post on tab order. It is just two ways to get to the same point. Sorry, I think the code/code block may not be available if you are using 1.1.5 (not positive) but I currently have 2.0 installed so I am guessing. Either way, you can use new/code/code and enter multiple lines of code. I did this when creating the button callback for the example.

I personally like using fluid as well which was why I posted the example of how to use fluid instead of hand coding with fltk. Hope this was helpful.

__________________
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it comes dressed in overalls and looks like work."
--Thomas Alva Edison
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Benjamin Franklin
"A happy person is not a person in a certain set of circumstances, but rather a person with a certain set of attitudes."
--Hugh Downs

After reading dsmith's review of FLU in this thread I realized, there are some downsides to using fluid. You don't have direct access to the additional packages like FLU or others that are available. Oh, well. Perhaps that is what the plug-in's in 2.0 are for. Aside from that, you still can use fluid to whip up your base interface and add support for those additional widgets by hand. I suppose you could add them in with fluid using the method I described above but really, if you have a choice for large amounts of hand coding, between using the fluid code dialogs and an editor of choice I think using an external editor (with all the bells and whistles your particular editor has) would be the better choice.

Great, now I'm on the fence. I do agree with dsmith on this though, FLTK makes it easy to go with one or the other or a combination of both. What you are comfortable with will is likely be most productive for you. Fluid does make it easy (especially if new to FLTK like myself) to see how fltk expects the source to look. Even if you create a set of widgets in a window with fluid and replace code by hand fluid shows you a good place to jump in.

__________________
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it comes dressed in overalls and looks like work."
--Thomas Alva Edison
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Benjamin Franklin
"A happy person is not a person in a certain set of circumstances, but rather a person with a certain set of attitudes."
--Hugh Downs

Hello,
Thanks dsmith and cable_guy for the replies. My own view was that any restrictions caused by fluid were likely to be minor. You have confirmed that, so fluid looks like the way to go.

Regarding some widgets not being available in fluid, that's OK for my purposes. I mainly want a straightforward GUI.
I have used a widget called CARTESIAN that I found on the web (It draws 2D graphs). I wrote a program that used Cartesian to draw a graph in a box in a simple GUI produced with fluid. So I know that widgets can be incorporated quite easily.

Dsmith: I'm using opengl to do some geometric computing. I'm interested in 4D objects (hypercubes etc) and I want a GUI with sliders and dials etc for manipulating the image on screen. I started off using QT and used it in one of my first programs. (I develop on LINUX but would like the option of porting to Windows). Apart from the licensing for QT being more restrictive, I found it had quite a high overhead. I like the 'fast' part of 'fast light toolkit'. I was very impressed by Greg Ercolano's video tutorials, so I switched to fltk and don't regret it.

I'm using version 1.1.4 on Linux. I have 1.1.5rc2 installed on Windows 2000 but I don't use it much.

Great forum!

Ray