31–40 of 279 posts
Small comment: It's possible to stitch together UI/video/3D without dealing with the compositor, if you use child windows instead (or in wayland terms, a subsurface). On win32 at least, it's a much simpler approach.
It works on multiple platforms, and is flexible, and it's easier to find off the shelf pieces due to the web technology involved, and it's lighter than Electron. It's a no-brainer for me (and others, I think) if I'm starting a new GUI desktop project.
This is it! Browsers handle all of this. It's a ton of work. Many many gui kits start with just ASCII and really don't realize how deep the rabbit hole is for making all of this work.
And as always, if you haven't read them
Small comment: It's possible to stitch together UI/video/3D without dealing with the compositor, if you use child windows instead (or in wayland terms, a subsurface). On win32 at least, it's a much simpler approach.
And of course a Wayland subsurface is using the compositor.
[1]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/directcomp/ba... [2]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/quartzcore/catrans...
The background for this is that most existing UI toolkits are a poor fit for Rust. Rust doesn't like having shared mutable state, but event-based UIs have a global event loop and can mutate anything at any time. Rust works best with strictly tree-shaped data structures, but event handlers turn trees of widgets into arbitrary webs with possibility of circular references. Rust prefers everything thread-safe, but many U…
I wonder if something like SwiftUI would work well for Rust.
The background for this is that most existing UI toolkits are a poor fit for Rust. Rust doesn't like having shared mutable state, but event-based UIs have a global event loop and can mutate anything at any time. Rust works best with strictly tree-shaped data structures, but event handlers turn trees of widgets into arbitrary webs with possibility of circular references. Rust prefers everything thread-safe, but many U…
Swift is different from Rust, but it's more towards Rust's end of the spectrum. Sure, it has classes, but it's almost as if they're mostly there to aid in compatibility with Objective-C APIs like UIKit. SwiftUI builds UIs with value types and protocols like View. I wonder if something like SwiftUI would work well for Rust.
> On macOS ... going forward, it’s likely that new capabilities and evolutions of the design language will be provided for the latter [SwiftUI] but not the former [AppKit]. I think this is vastly over-stating the technical churn of UI development on macOS. While we're definitely seeing new UI toolkits introduced that are Swift-only (like the new Charts.framework[0]), nearly every Mac app Apple ships is written using…
> On macOS ... going forward, it’s likely that new capabilities and evolutions of the design language will be provided for the latter [SwiftUI] but not the former [AppKit]. I think this is vastly over-stating the technical churn of UI development on macOS. While we're definitely seeing new UI toolkits introduced that are Swift-only (like the new Charts.framework[0]), nearly every Mac app Apple ships is written using…
Aren't App Store and Photos Mac Catalyst apps?
You can examine which frameworks a binary links by running `otool -l /System/Applications/Photos.app/Contents/MacOS/Photos`. Traditional macOS Cocoa apps will link AppKit, while Catalyst apps will link UIKit.
For example, if you run that command with a Catalyst app (e.g., Messages or Maps), you'll see that those apps link against `/System/iOSSupport/System/Library/Frameworks/UIKit.framework/Versions/A/UIKit`, and AppKit is nowhere to be found.