<div dir="ltr"><font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Both Gtk and Qt work seamlessly under Windows, and launching your tool as an external process might be feasible. <br><br>(I did something similar at Orbotech about 15y ago when I wrote an external tool in Perl/Tk that exactly matched the colors and fonts of the external C++/Motif based GUI. In a certain scenario the tool would be launched and as it was frameless it snugly overlayed part of the GUI. When the interaction was done it was popped down, and the customers had not any clue that they had been interacting with an external tool. :-)<br>
<br>Regards,<br>Dov<br><br></font><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Oleg Goldshmidt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pub@goldshmidt.org" target="_blank">pub@goldshmidt.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><font face="georgia,serif"><br></font><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Dov Grobgeld <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dov.grobgeld@gmail.com" target="_blank">dov.grobgeld@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif">The advantage of using Qt or Gtk compared with some of the other gui toolkits mentioned (fltk, Tcl/Tk, SDL, or Matlab GUI) are that they are complete (lots of widgets, internationalization and localization support etc) if the prototype turns into something bigger than was initially envisioned. To often have I seen tools that were written like "oh, its's only for me" and then a company is trying to figure out how to deploy and support the tool. I therefore thing it is worth taking the time to learn complexity of one of these GUI's, and then use it.<br>
</font></div></blockquote></div><div><br>I understand all of this and this is exactly why I stressed in the original post that I was sure it would be thrown away. The reason is that our product includes a very sophisticated GUI that is Windows/.NET and I do not see either the company or our customers to switch to, say, Linux/Qt in the foreseeable future. So whatever we do in a demo/mockup/prototype will have to be re-implemented in the current GUI framework. What we do not currently have is skilled GUI development resources to participate in the prototyping effort, so integrating the prototype with the existing GUI is out of the question.<br>
<br>Therefore feature-completeness is not a consideration in this particular case, though I fully support the philosophy in general.<br clear="all"><br>Thanks to all those who have already made suggestions, and keep them coming. I cannot keep up in real time (i.e., each time something gets mentioned, look it up, evaluate, respond), so my lack of specific reactions does not mean I am not paying close attention.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
</font></span></div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>-- <br>Oleg Goldshmidt | <a href="mailto:oleg@goldshmidt.org" target="_blank">pub@goldshmidt.org</a><br>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>