[sword-devel] roadmap for Windows frontend(?)

[Chris Little]

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Daniel Glassey wrote:

> I haven't kept track if it but has there been any progress on compiling
> gecko on bcb?

No, none to my knowledge.  I have also been unable to get ICU to compile 
through BCB since ICU 2.1.

> Or is the aim going to be to compile gecko into a dll
> somehow with vc++, then create an import lib for bcb and then use it
> that way?

Unless Gecko is actually a C library, this is impossible.  MSVC & BCB use 
different object file formats.  For C libraries it is possible (at least 
I'm told) to convert between the two.  For BCB, it is not.

> How long do you think it will take to get gecko rendering done?

With the ActiveX control (which looks like Troy's current plan) it won't 
take long, since it was done once previously.

But if we do intend just to use the ActiveX control, we should not use
Mozilla since there is no advantage.  My experience working with it in the
past was that the Mozilla ActiveX control was just a slow, buggy failed
attempt to mimic the MSIE control.  Better to just use the MSIE control
itself, and benefit from its support of <ruby> annotation as well to
provide us some quick & easy interlinear support.

--Chris