I just recalled this… Maybe a message to Bob to see what’s happening with it?
Thanks, but
The FTC is officially supported for OS X Cocoa and Windows. It may work in Linux in limited fashion but we do not officially support Linux.
… and Linux is pretty widely used in Science …
I can count on one hand the number of times someone contacted me about Linux support. So I’ve never pursued it.
I really want FTC to find a new home. I don’t like the idea of open sourcing it for a lot of reasons. There have been a few nibbles but nothing serious.
FTC and Shorts
True.
I would think Xojo Inc for integration into Xojo would be their ideal home. Even with API2 the API1 code will run for many years …
1 Like
I’d love to
It would have to be a sensible business deal for Bob though
As I said: Science.
Instead of money changing hands he could take a cut on all future sales (maybe up to a maximum).
I’m sure there are lots of things that might work
Its why I said
It would have to be a sensible business deal for Bob though
And i’d have to be sure I had the time to dedicate to it, set up sales, licensing etc
There’s definitely a non-zero amount of effort to undertake this
1 Like
Please, explain to a non-native english speaker who is interested in understanding what LCD means, except Liquid Crystal Display.
I’m guessing what you wrote here is a key conception of how Xojo works (and lacks things).
1 Like
Lowest Common Denominator
Yeah, took me a while too …
1 Like
And yes, it’s a key concept of Xojo … 
Sorry… I don’t know if it standard English or not actually, my dear Sir. Its probably something I use in my own language that I use to communicate with my future self.
Thinking about it, it is weird as GCD means to me “Grand Central Dispatch” and is a technology that I love for multi-threading on the Mac.
Ah, thank you.
Feeling more and more that way, also.
1 Like
I’m guessing native english speakers have probably understood “immediately”.
I have a similar list of identically-abbreviated words; sometimes, it’s even one in english and the other in french… 
1 Like
abstracting the commonalities out to be x-platform but still making it possible to get at the native control so it can be modified would be nice
if they set up a hierarchy like
Control
RectControl
Button (the x-platform thing)
macButton (with mac specific methods & properties - not sure about events)
windowsButton (with windows specific things as per mac)
linuxButton (with linux specific things as per mac)
iosButton (with ios specific things as per mac)and at RUNTIME a button was actually a macButton so you could use #if targetMacOS in its open event etc an customize it
then when you run on windows its actually a windowsButton
so they are runtime only types (that way you still design generically but CAN code platform specifics in the same way you do now
dunno
1 Like
Wouldn’t it be possible for them to define separate classes that the IDE would handle as the base class?
Like:
Control
RectControl
Button
MacButton
WindowsButton
LinuxButton
(…)
(sorry for the formatting; spaces are trimmed in this forum)
You’d put a “generic button” on the window. In code, you’d be able to do this: MacButton(MyButton).SpecificMacProperty=1
I recognise a Button may be a LinuxButton (thus casting it as a MacButton would fail), but if the framework would/could allow defining a UI element as a possible sub-class, we would be able to use MacButton(TheButton) or WindowsButton(TheButton) from.a generic button put on the window. Not sure why it’s not doable…
Perhaps but then whats the point if its going to treat them as the base class and show only its properties etc ?