Well, I wouldn’t really call it a wrapper of a wrapper since it basically gives you the same interface as wxWindows except with c#’isms, such as properties. I would still call it bindings. I would call it a wrapper if it “wrapped” up the wxWindows classes/interfaces into even higher-level interfaces.
For being a fairly low-profile, crossplatform gui for c# it is suprisingly complete. I sure like it a lot better than gtk# which was intentionally kept(interface wise) similiar to gtk+ so that gtk+ programmers would have an easy time learning it.
The only thing that needs to be fixed(IMO) in wx.net is the MFC/Macro-like event/callback connecting mechanism which will be turned into a c# delegate/event mechanism..
Lets just hope it compiles to dll this time with mingw.
There’s c# bindings for wxwindows too(wxnet.sourceforge.net) that run on mono, pnet, .NET.
I’m sure Coocachoo and Croanon are downloading the bindings now:)
isn’t wxwindows a wrapper it self (for win32api, gtk, carbon or so)?
so wx.net is a wrapper for a wrapper??
Well, I wouldn’t really call it a wrapper of a wrapper since it basically gives you the same interface as wxWindows except with c#’isms, such as properties. I would still call it bindings. I would call it a wrapper if it “wrapped” up the wxWindows classes/interfaces into even higher-level interfaces.
For being a fairly low-profile, crossplatform gui for c# it is suprisingly complete. I sure like it a lot better than gtk# which was intentionally kept(interface wise) similiar to gtk+ so that gtk+ programmers would have an easy time learning it.
The only thing that needs to be fixed(IMO) in wx.net is the MFC/Macro-like event/callback connecting mechanism which will be turned into a c# delegate/event mechanism..
You can also get a Java version of it (wx4j), it is indead a very nice toolkit.