[Ant]

It's time to think on the name for Duit.

Duit is fine but there are too many matches on google even just for IT.

Duit is pronounce " do it".

what about Douit - also pronounce "do it"?

and what about keeping the name DUI?

Ant

[h3r3tic]

[JJR]

I agree Tom. Douit doesn't quite do it.

GUILD is quite clever; I like it. Frankly, I'm wondering whether it's worth worrying about Google at all. It will be very difficult to choose a satisfactory name that Google doesn't know about already.

Any other suggestions?

-JJR

[kaarna]

First (off topic):

Great to see that some people are bringing a D binding for GTK+ up to date! I had already started doing it myself for five minutes, but then I thought that, propably someone else has already done this.

Second (on the name):

I think there are two different emphasis' that could be chosen. You might want to choose a name that points to the D community that you're trying to make a GUI-library for them. I think DUI or Duit, reflects this very well.
Or you might want to try to appeal to the whole open source community, and particularly gnome/gtk+/gtkmm programmers. I think, that in this case the name should be in line with the following bindings for the big languages:

C++ - gtkmm
Java - java-gnome
Perl - gtk2-perl
Python - PyGTK

And I personally would prefer keeping the GTK letters there, to show people with just the first glance, that this is actually a binding for GTK+.
So, it should be either DGtk or GtkD.
And this would go well with the "first letter capitalized" thing that you're doing to the original GTK+ functions. (gtkmm for instance isn't doing this, they're preserving them as "do_something()".)

So if my vote counts, I vote for

GtkD

-only 701 google hits (today)!

[Ant]

[he-man]

GtkD would be good I think, more identificable for the community.

[PsychoBrat]

I'd have to agree with 'GtkD', for what it's worth. (maybe knowing that more randoms agree with the idea is somehow reassuring? )

What is the current approach to this project. Are you planning on:

• Mostly one-to-one relationship with GTK functions, etc; or
  
• gtkmm-style wrappers to make a proper object-oriented interface; or
  
• Something more fancy, including things like swing-style callbacks to make use of d's more advanced features; or
  
• Something else I've failed to think of

-Jeff

[Calvin]

I vote as well for GtkD. It looks and sounds good.

[PsychoBrat]

I'm going to resurrect this topic with a proposal, since it seems awfully quiet around here.

As far as naming is concerned, "GTKD" might not look quite as nice, but I'd favour it over "GtkD" simply because it makes more sense; when did the 'T' and 'K' cease to be initials? I'd also be happy enough with "gtkd", since at least it's consistent.

My proposal is to split the project into two parts:

1. gtkc - Fully functional and as direct as possible bindings to GTK and companion libraries / dependencies (cairo, glib, etc.). Nothing clever like allowing functions to take d-style strings would be done here; very much the basics.
   
2. gtkd - The more advanced D wrappers around GTK and friends, based on the direct bindings in gtkc. This would be what gtkmm and cairomm are to C++ (but making use of the nice features afforded to us in D ).

So the package structure could, for example, end up something like the following:

[Ant]

[JJR]

Great ideas, PsychoBrat. If Ant agrees, it must be even better.

I think your suggestion is the way to go. gtkd (or whatever variation) seems good enough too.

-JJR

[PsychoBrat]

Do you think it would actually be wise to attempt to bring bindings and OO abstractions for associated libraries such as cairo, pango and atk under the one master project, or would it be better to "lead by example" by providing a clean package structure and conventions that other related projects could follow?

Daniel Keep has contributed his cairo bindings to the bindings project on dsource (see http://dsource.org/projects/bindings/browser/trunk/cairo), and, as far as I know, he's sticking fairly closely to cairomm's style for his OO layer. It would be good if we could get in touch with him and figure out some standards for issues that are going to be relevant across bindings and OO abstractions for all these related libraries.

His work looks nice so far, but I'm not sure I like the sound of "cairooo"!

[slomojo83]

To me, gtkd seems like the best name. At first when I looked at the project, it was hard to tell its relationship with GTK.

Thanks for the work on this project. I have been wanting to try D for years, but it has never seemed to have enough support and be polished enough to seriously consider until recently. Having a full GUI library will help the popularity of D tremendously!

[PsychoBrat]