Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!eecg.toronto.edu!eric
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
From: eric@eecg.toronto.edu (Eric Smith)
Subject: Re: XVT Programming (QUERY) (Was Re: Programming for Windows-3 AND Mac)
Message-ID: <1991Jan22.180430.5281@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Keywords: high level language, programming, windows-3, Mac, XVT
Organization: EECG, University of Toronto
References: <1991Jan13.020913.8353@lth.se> <1991Jan14.211226.17872@isc.rit.edu> <957@redford.UUCP>
Date: 22 Jan 91 23:04:30 GMT
Lines: 52

In article <957@redford.UUCP> bill@redford.UUCP (Bill Poitras(X258)) writes:
>In article <1991Jan14.211226.17872@isc.rit.edu> cms2839@isc.rit.edu (C.M. Stuntz ) writes:
>>
>>				XVT ( eXtensible Virtual Toolkit ) from
>>GSS , will allow you to use a single source code that is protable
>[stuff deleted]
>>
>Can any one out there attest to their worth?  Has anyone had any
>experience with XVT?  I would like to know any problems with XVT to see
>if I can use it for cross platform development.

Well, I have had the wonderful experience of working with XVT in
a project for one of our clients, who wanted a system which would
run on both Macintosh and Windows.  Since I was familiar with
CommonView, we decided that it would be safest to go with XVT :-).

XVT does a good job of getting things started, since the API is
simpler than that of either Mac or Windows.  However, the simpler
API does mean that some user interface features are unsupported
(e.g. Mac-style popup menus, Windows 3-style combo-boxes,
Windows/PM-style DDE), and a number of other features are
available, but with reduced functionality (e.g.  edit controls on
dialogs are restricted to 255 characters, list boxes can only be
on dialog windows, and fonts are handled in a minimal way).
However, overall, XVT has done a good job of choosing a core set
of features.

The implementation, particularly in the Windows version, I found
to be somewhat less solid than the concept.  Three months into
our project we had a functional, but not complete version of our
program.  The next six months were spent trying to get XVT to
work the way we wanted it to on both platforms.  The main areas
of difficulty were dialogs (which are a royal pain), printing
(also a pain, but that's true for both Mac and Windows as well),
and lists (both list boxes and slists, which are XVT's version of
singly-linked lists).

I would recommend XVT for someone who wants to create prototypes
on multiple platforms, but not for anyone who is trying to write
commercial or commercial-quality software...  XVT leaves just too
many rough edges.  In retrospect, our project would have been
more efficiently completed if we had written the two versions in
the native APIs instead of using XVT.

Hope this helps,
Eric Smith

Generic Design Systems Corporation	(416) 236-0908
1199 Islington Ave.			eric@eecg.toronto.edu	
Etobicoke, Ont.				CompuServe:  72371,3015
M8Z 4T2					GEnie:  E.SMITH29