On 6/7/97 I posted on Team-Ada
>I'm curious about the style of the GUI interface code that people
>plan for Ada programs on Windows 95/NT targets. Is it mostly
>1) simple interface/complex program, or 2) complex but very custom
>(ie, not especially "Windows Style") interface, or 3) complex
>interface following closely, and using many of, the standard
>"Windows look and feel" features.
Good thing I asked. I'd thought a lot of Ada programs would be,
say, real time control or something with relatively specialized
operator interaction, ie, types 1 or 2. But the majority of the
folks responding are very interested in the 'shrink wrapped
Windows product' type 3 look-and-feel. Special thanks to those
who gave additional comments, some of which (hopefully not badly
out of context) were:
emulating the style of widely used MS products such as Office
fairly closely should not be difficult to do using the binding.
We would like to have MFC level GUI control. The problem is, in
my humble (but correct) opinion, the way Microsoft does gui's is
I think most Win32 developers want a windows look and feel with
their Ada applications.
... The first is people migrating their other OS applications
(usually Unix) to Windows NT-- these people seem to want UI
migration packages and don't really care about the "Windows look
and feel". The second is people who want to take advantage of all
the perceived benefits of using Windows, eg, ActiveX, OLE, etc.
The network 'Ping' program is an example. ... Why waste the
programming effort to build a fancy version that ...
Windows capability, such as an IDE written in Ada for Ada. For
these applications I intend to general follow the Windows style,
but with a few extensions of my own. For example, I hate ...
3. - since adhering to style guides is crucial in the
acceptability of commercial software products on the market
We are looking at web-style interfaces with a great deal of