Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnewsh!wolf
From: wolf@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.wolf)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re:  Comparing OLIT and Xt+
Message-ID: <1990Nov29.130443.15973@cbnewsh.att.com>
Date: 29 Nov 90 13:04:43 GMT
References: <9011290334.AA06617@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 37

From article <9011290334.AA06617@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>, by cflatter@ZIA.AOC.NRAO.EDU (Chris Flatters):
> 
> 	Has anyone had the opportunity to work with both AT&T's Xt+
> 	toolkit and Sun's OLIT toolkit?  (Both api's produce OPEN LOOK
> 	style windows.)  If so, are there any significant differences
> 	between the two?
> 
> I believe that OLIT is Xt+, modified by Sun for X11R4.
> 
> 
> 	In particular are there any problems running a program with 
> 	AT&T's Xt+ that was developed using Sun's OLIT?  Any problems
> 	the other way around? 
> 
> I compiled the examples from John Miller's "An OPEN LOOK at UNIX" with
> only one problem (if you don't count getting the source off the 5-1/4
> inch floppy fixed in the back cover): one of the files was missing a header.
> I would be surprised if there were any really significant problems in
> going between the two.
> 
> 			Chris Flatters

The two seem to be fairly compatible, but I noticed a couple "bothersome"
differences: (1) The setting of window attribute properties is different;
applications that attempt to set window decorations the "Xt+ way", may not
function fully under the OW2.0 window manager.  Also, the Xt+ toolkit defines
a field in the OlWinAttr structure (Xol/OlClients.h) that, for some reason, is
commented out in the OLIT version.  If you have an application that uses this
field, it won't compile.

Tom

-- 
+-------------------------------------+ "Stupid" questions are better than
| Thomas Wolf   | (201) 615-4789      | no questions at all. No answer is
| Bell Labs, NJ | wolf@mink.att.com   | better than a stupid one.
+-------------------------------------+