Here's some example applications that are in the wild, using Eto.Forms: Once you've installed a new version of Mono on Ubuntu, you can run the same sample as Gtk3, as I'm doing here in a VM.
#Gui toolkit mono for mac zip#
Here's a great example zip that has precompiled test apps. You should definitely give it a try.Įven on the same platform (Windows in the below example) amazingly Eto.Forms can use whatever Native Controls you prefer. Or I can just File | New Project with their Visual Studio Extension.
#Gui toolkit mono for mac code#
Note that it's not just Code First, you can also use Xaml, or even Json (.jeto) to layout your forms! using Eto.Forms Ĭontent = new Label
#Gui toolkit mono for mac windows#
NET that run across multiple platforms using their native toolkit.
NET Core, and there's xplat Mono.Įto.Forms has been in development since 2012 and is a cross-platform framework for creating GUI (Graphical User Interface, natch) applications with. While not officially supported by Microsoft - you can do some awesome stuff.as is how Open Source is supposed to work! Remember that there's a family of. Not to mention iPhone/Android apps with Xamarin and video games with Unity and MonoGame. People are using it to create micro services, web sites, and webAPI's all over. sure, you still get sandboxed code, but that’s only half the benefit of Mono/.Net to me.This is one of those " Did you know you could do THAT?" Many folks have figured out that C#/F#/.NET is cross-platform and open0source and runs on basically any operating system. No one says “i don’t want to write code for X11, i’m going to create my own window server” when writing an app on Unix-like OSes, so why should a new GUI toolkit be made for every platform Mono runs on? In my opinion, this is the same problem (mistake) Microsoft left us with in the first place: cross platform ability, but locked to a single platform. Instead of writing a thousand different interfaces which only work on one platform, why not get a good implementation of Windows.Forms that can be designed to work on multiple platforms (like Qt), and then make libraries like Cocoa# that bind to Windows.Forms (which in turn would bind to Cocoa or GTK/Qt/Whatever in Linux or would be the last step in Windows), so when i compile my program my only external dependency is Windows.Forms which is *assumed* to be available on any system running. Write code once, compile code once, run sandboxed code anywhere. Net which Microsoft totally won’t take advantage of, is its cross platform capabilities (something Java got right). Net/Mono code if i still had to rewrite the GUI for every system i wanted it to run on? why not write common libraries in Mono/.Net and write the GUI in a native toolset? I agree with you twob, and i think a lot of this goes back to what Joel Spolsky said back in january ( ). You create your application with the same presenter and model libraries but with different view libraries depending on the platform you are deploying. The actual FileDialog object created by GTK, WinForms, or Cocoa would implement this interface. IFileDialog would probably only have one method filename, location, and a show method. The forms and objects of the View implement Interfaces exposed by the “Presenter”.įor example a File Dialog would implement IFileDialog exposed by the Presenter.
Then you have your “View” which is created with a specific graphics toolkit (Windows Forms, GTK, Cocoa, etc). You have a “Presenter” that is an abstracted model of the UI that manipulates your data. Using patterns like Model-View-Presenter allows you to do this.īasically you have a core set of libraries that store, and calculates your data. You have to design your application to take advantage of this.
0 kommentar(er)
