DOKUMEN123.COM

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

LibRocket

Should be added, I think: https://github.com/libRocket/libRocket — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.39.37.99 (talk) 19:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GWEN

Should be added, I think: https://github.com/garrynewman/GWEN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.39.37.99 (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

High-level, low-level

So let's see, we have Motif and Xaw listed in both sections. What needs be done?
--Jerome Potts (talk) 07:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The comment in low-level only notes that both Motif and Xaw use Xt. (The remark that only they use it is inaccurate, but reflects common gossip, which needs a reliable source to qualify it). Tedickey (talk) 14:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting

i think the sorting should be cleaned up, as it doesn't really yield much usefull information - f.ex. GTK+ is available for most languages, and its SVG based, and it runs on the X-window system. I think Toolkits should rather be sorted after on which platform they are available, or on which languages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.191.19.129 (talk) 20:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ZK

What about ZK (www.zkoss.org, open source RIA framework); should it be listed here as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.148.214.178 (talk) 13:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amiga OS Intuition

Since Amiga OS 2.0, Intuition.library became disk based [...]. Also Workbench.library and Icon.library became disk based [...].

In my teenage years, I ran AmigaOS 2.05 (release version 37). I cannot remember that I ever have seen that library on disk. Maybe somebody should check that claim for those three libraries. 91.67.108.234 (talk) 08:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I recall intuition library was always in ROM and the other two (workbench and icon) were always on disk. The 2.0 release did see the addition of gadtools.library on top of intuition and I'm fairly certain that was in ROM too. 80.177.15.191 (talk) 12:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between High- and Low-Level

The difference between high-level and low-level should be explained. One could argue that it is intuitively understandable. But why is Cocoa low-level? It brings a pretty high level of abstraction and a big collection of widgets. In order to use it, you need to know few about the operation of the window system. Maybe the sections should be separated into "native APIs" and "APIs on top". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.6.109.5 (talk) 07:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC) Actually, Microsoft has already abandoned integrated graphics since 2006 for their Windows system. I do not have a source, but suspect that Apple does not integrate graphics in the kernel any more since OS X. The difference would be whether the system switches to kernel mode for graphics function calls. Btw, I am not sure about the remark on Xt; isn't Xt an abstract layer, which was supposed to allow developers develop different widgets sets with a common programmers' interface ? I support the suggestion about native APIs, it is just that Microsoft's native NT api is undocumented Greenskynr151 (talk) 14:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic Windows

What about including the Dynamic Windows library in the list? It is available here: http://dwindows.netlabs.org It is under a BSD-like license, supports OS/2, Windows, Unix and Mac. It is written in C (and Objective-C on the Mac) and has bindings for REXX. Os2nuke (talk) 18:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Table

I've started a comparison table which, as it is also sortable, enables the reader to quickly compare different toolkits. Please expand the list and tweak it as you see fit. -- Mecanismo | Talk 14:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IUP really for Mac OS?

The document says list IUP as a toolkit available for Linux, MacOS and Windows. Looking at UIP Availability, I can't see any mention of MacOS. The page shows no MacOS screen‑shot neither. Is this something to be fixed in the page (the one at Wikipedia)? --Hibou57 (talk) 12:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Funny… Wikipedia is right, and that's the IUP website which is wrong. Another location, SourceForge, shows IUP indeed exist for MacOS: sourceforge.net/projects/iup/files/3.6/Other Libraries. --Hibou57 (talk) 12:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WinAPI

The "Comparison of widget toolkits" table lists the "Main language" for WinAPI as C++, but the WinAPI page says "The Windows API (Win32) is focused mainly on the programming language C". I think it's this page that's wrong, but I'm not certain enough to make the edit just yet. --MQDuck (talk) 11:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of widget toolkits. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

LCDUI from Java ME?

Are there bindings from C? Cybil? 46.211.162.130 (talk) 07:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CMU toolkits plus CLX for Lisp

Athena, Amulet (C++), Garnet (Lisp), Plus X11 has one for Common Lisp (CLX) 2600:1014:B134:7884:E108:2290:3B23:5D41 (talk) 23:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

C++ toolkits: InterViews, Fresco

Interviews/Unidraw is an X11 toolkit (see ivtools), Fresco was CORBA-based, for Windows, Mac, X11. 2600:1014:B134:7884:E108:2290:3B23:5D41 (talk) 23:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is "cross-platform" different from "Yes," "Yes" and "Yes"?

In the table, some frameworks are described as "cross-platform," while other frameworks are only said to support both Windows, macOS and Unix-like. Is there a difference between these two way of describing the frameworks, or why are they described differently? —Kri (talk) 09:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. An explicit distinction would be useful. Both AWT and Swing are marked as 'cross-patform' but they work differently. The "heavyweight, or native" AWT is described as follows:

When Sun Microsystems first released Java in 1995, AWT widgets provided a thin level of abstraction over the underlying native user-interface. For example, creating an AWT check box would cause AWT directly to call the underlying native subroutine that created a check box. However, the check box on Windows is not the same as the check box on macOS or on the various types of Unix. Some application developers prefer this model because it provides a high degree of fidelity to the underlying native windowing toolkit and seamless integration with native applications. In other words, a GUI program written using AWT looks like a native Microsoft Windows application when run on Windows, but the same program looks like a native Apple Macintosh application when run on a Mac, etc. However, some application developers dislike this model because they prefer their applications to look exactly the same on every platform. - AWT

On the same page, the "lightweight" Swing is described as follows:

In J2SE 1.2, the Swing toolkit largely superseded the AWT's widgets. In addition to providing a richer set of UI widgets, Swing draws its own widgets (by using Java 2D to call into low-level subroutines in the local graphics subsystem) instead of relying on the operating system's high-level user interface module. Swing provides the option of using either the native platform's "look and feel" or a cross-platform look and feel (the "Java Look and Feel") that looks the same on all windowing systems. - ibid.

Swing is further described as such:

Unlike AWT components, Swing components are not implemented by platform-specific code. Instead, they are written entirely in Java and therefore are platform-independent.

Given this difference, it would be nice to know how both count as 'cross-platform'.

- wneo (talk) 05:55, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]