Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
No, Brick has been and will always be for terminals. That was, after all, the reason I built it, and I would recommend that if people want to build applications with GUIs then there are lots of better libraries for that! On the topic of the "widget" notion in Brick, its "widgets" are not quite the same kind of thing as one finds in typical GUI libraries. In typical GUI libraries, "widget" is the name given to something that has an on-screen representation and its state and its event handling machinery. In Brick, all three of those things are separate and the "widget" is only its on-screen representation. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thank you so much for the response. As far as GUIs go, gi-gtk-declarative seems dead, monomer is a bit slow in development, so I guess I should give wxwidgets a try (new maintainer, I think). The GUI point is more that Brick is a well-established and goto library in Haskell, and it's declarative. Thank you so much for the library; it's an absolutely great cornerstone. By the way, if someone made a GUI library and claimed it was inspired by Brick, would you have issues with that? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm glad you're finding it useful!
No, that would frankly be pretty cool as far as I'm concerned! Brick itself was inspired by gloss, at least, Gloss circa 2015 when I started building Brick. :) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm familiar with another UI library, that seems to be, well, a bit undermaintained. One suggestion (that got shot down) was splitting the library up so that the execution space and the widgets were split into separate packages, to encourage custom widget creation and separate package creation.
Another element is, well, brick is the standard Haskell TUI library. Is there any interest in building a GUI edition for it, sharing the same widget system?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions