MFC?
Posted by: zack
Date: August 23, 2000 12:35AM

I dunno, I've always been one of those Win32 SDK/Anti-MFC types for some reason, just a speed freak I guess. Don't you think an application that's aimed towards speed an efficiency would be better developed without MFC? Perhaps the overhead MFC brings along is exaggerated a lot of the time, but still - if you develop two apps in paralell, one with MFC and the other with the raw Win32(platform?) SDK, there's no doubt which'll be faster (well, assuming both coders are of the some competence). I was actually thinking really hard about coding a galeon-esque app for windows, and when i saw your project i got really excited that i might get the chance to help out, then I was just kind of disappointed to see this when I downloaded the source. In fact, don't get me wrong, the application itself seems very responsive and speedy (i DO have a 700MHz athlon, thoughsmiling smiley. It's a really great foundation for an MSIE killer ;). So ANYWAY, just my $0.02 ;)

later,
zack

RE: MFC?
Posted by: Christophe
Date: August 23, 2000 12:38AM

Well, i'm 100% for non-MFC applications. But here, MFC saved me a lot of time for developping K-Meleon.

If someone can find a good way to get rid of that MFC layer (basically that would be just to be able to create SingleDocTemplate, Rebar, and such MFC stuff that K-Meleon relies upon), i would be more than happy to get rid of it smiling smiley

Also, K-Meleon use the nice BCG library for menus, toolbar background, etc... So i think that removing/replacing the MFC is not that simple :/

-christophe

RE: MFC?
Date: August 23, 2000 01:07AM

The Windows Template Library, or WTL, (the undocumented cousin to the COM-superstar ATL) might offer all that is needed for removing MFC from this baby (and I do mean baby...excellent job there Christophe...)

- jer

RE: MFC?
Posted by: wa1er
Date: August 23, 2000 01:33AM

Won't more bloat be removed by removing the chrome engine and converting it to standard Windows widgets, even if just converting it to MFC for the time being? The chromes appear to take up too much memory...

Otherwise, great job, K-Meleon rules!

RE: MFC?
Posted by: zack
Date: August 23, 2000 08:32AM

The things that you claim "BCG" implements are readily usable in microsoft's "rebar" common control, you don't need a library to take advantage of them (at least i think you don't). You'll have to excuse my ignorance though, i'm not really familiar the components or counterparts of mozilla. What exactly is "chrome"? What's BCG? Perhaps you me and a few others can band together and make a version based completely on the Platform SDK (maybe even write a rudimentary C++ class libary for creating Win32 GUIs and distribute that as well)? E-mail me with any ideas you might have and i'll be sure to check the board regularly smiling smiley

later,
zack

RE: MFC?
Posted by: zack
Date: August 23, 2000 08:41AM

perhaps an irc meeting is in order?
-zack

RE: MFC?
Posted by: wa1er
Date: August 26, 2000 04:27AM

You guessed exactly, without knowing. Chromes are Mozilla-style skins, which use the Mozilla GFX widget library. They are made using XCF, which is an XML-based standard for defining user interfaces (?) but the real problem is it means you have to have a billion instances of the rendering engine for all the widgets. The only part of Mozilla you want is Gecko, and once it's reusable, you should need no more than a "gecko.h" to build K-Meleon. So, the way to do this is exactly what you said, build it from scratch with nothing but the Platform SDK. Then you can also remove the toolbar backgrounds and that stuff.

I made a mockup of what the interface could look like at http://people.ne.mediaone.net/rbromfield/kmeleon.bmp (yes, it it sadly a bitmap because all I had for the mockup was MS paint). It doesn't look fully like IE, but it's the most usable possible interface [in my opinion -]. Also, at http://people.ne.mediaone.net/rbromfield/kmeleon.txt there's an overview of the menu structure, including four main menus. Notice the absence of context menus, for consistency between Mac and Windows interfaces (macs only have 1 button...)

This is probably old news, but what the hell.

RE: MFC?
Posted by: BooBoo
Date: August 26, 2000 08:01AM

have you ever thought about using the same layer that Opera has used to develop its web browser?


RE: MFC?
Posted by: etoffi
Date: August 29, 2000 05:03PM

booboo:
what layer is that?

zack, jeremy:
check out sol2000

RE: MFC?
Posted by: Josef
Date: August 30, 2000 06:36PM

Hi,
about "rebar" control: It's possible to do it without any "BCG" library, all things are already in comctl32.dll, but only in new versions (from IE3). Microsoft wrote some tutorial about it, where you can create exactly same "rebar" as they have in IE. I can give link if you wish.

where can I find info about gecko API? Let say, I have buffer with HTML code and hWnd (or hDC) of my window, where I wish to show HTML. Which dll I must use? Can you provide some general GECKO info? Thank you.

Josef

MFC version?
Posted by: Dan
Date: September 22, 2000 08:37AM

After a failed compile, it seems to me that the BCG library requires MFC 6. Does anybody know how to make BCG compile without buying VC6? Is there an SDK I can download?

K-Meleon forum is powered by Phorum.