Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ll-xn!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!ATHENA.MIT.EDU!swick
From: swick@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ralph R. Swick)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Xtools
Message-ID: <8704141229.AA02862@ORPHEUS.MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 14-Apr-87 07:29:29 EST
Article-I.D.: ORPHEUS.8704141229.AA02862
Posted: Tue Apr 14 07:29:29 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Apr-87 23:45:15 EST
References: <376@hscfvax.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 26

The real answer is that you should choose from the available toolkits the one
that best addresses your individual needs at the moment and assume that you
are on your own (i.e. no support for the toolkit).  The Xtoolkit represents
one consensus opinion on how a user interface toolkit for X should be built,
and it happens to be one of the two or three major toolkit projects we are
supporting here at Project Athena.

Because it is an attempt at a consensus, the interfaces and the implementation
are guaranteed to change for a period of time.  As I said, assume no support
for any particular snapshot set of bits.  The Xtoolkit is very likely to be
the first toolkit to be released with X version 11, if early porting is of
concern to you.  Porting between a March snapshot of the Xtoolkit and any
later snapshot should be easier than porting from an entirely different
toolkit, but will not be transparent.

It is not our experience that Xtool is overly crippled by lack of X11
features, so I would not be hesitant to use it on that respect except perhaps
for some particularly demanding applications.

One large difference that _will_ have varying degrees of impact is the
minimalist approach taken to the visible characteristics of the widgets
themselves.  Xtool has not had the benefit of the long hours of work that
have obviously gone into the aesthetics of Sx and X-ray.  You will need to
decide for yourself how important each of these factors is.

-Ralph