4 ms·

Specifically, look into how XAML apps work on the Universal Windows Platform [1]. Windows application development moved past Win32 about ten years ago with the

Specifically, look into how XAML apps work on the Universal Windows Platform [1]. Windows application development moved past Win32 about ten years ago with the initial version of XAML (Windows Presentation Foundation). Nowadays, the event loop is still there under the hood, but it's abstracted away by the UI framework. You are left with independent views that can render themselves, but the raw event loop is exposed as higher level events raised by individual views (e.g., a single "Tapped" event instead of having to handle separate mouse/touch/pen/controller down+up events). Apps often use some sort of message bus for communicating between non-UI components in a decoupled way, which may or may not re-use the UI thread's event loop. In general, you try to minimize what happens on the main loop, since it can lead to UI unresponsiveness. However, in XAML the main event loop is actually a priority queue, so you can put stuff into it at lower priority than regular input events[2]. 1. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/dn894631.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/dn8946... 2. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/windows.ui.core.coredispatcher.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/window... Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft, where we're using XAML to build the Windows Shell.

pjmlp 11y ago
XAML is great, that is what XHTML should have become if browser vendors played ball. Oh well.
- nerraga 11y ago
  Source? I always took XHTML to be an effort to make html into a stricter more parse-friendly format. Xhtml lets you use an xml parser to pull apart a page rather than having to deal with some kind of markup tag soup (which also makes it a great target for tooling within an IDE). XAML is concerned with layouts and binding in ways that, I don't believe, were ever intended for Xhtml. I could be wrong but they've always seemed to be worlds apart.
  - pjmlp 11y ago
    That is what many that didn't bother to learn the specification thought. Quote (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#why http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#why) Document developers and user agent designers are constantly discovering new ways to express their ideas through new markup. In XML, it is relatively easy to introduce new elements or additional element attributes. The XHTML family is designed to accommodate these extensions through XHTML modules and techniques for developing new XHTML-conforming modules (described in the XHTML Modularization specification). These modules will permit the combination of existing and new feature sets when developing content and when designing new user agents. Quote (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq): If your document is just pure XHTML 1.0 (not including other markup languages) then you will not yet notice much difference. However as more and more XML tools become available, such as XSLT for tranforming documents, you will start noticing the advantages of using XHTML. XForms for instance will allow you to edit XHTML documents (or any other sort of XML document) in simple controllable ways. Semantic Web applications will be able to take advantage of XHTML documents. The old HTML behaviors would be achieved by XML stylesheets, rendering into HTML4 or XML events. There were then a plethora of standards planned to augment XHTML with application level. http://www.w3.org/standards/xml/components http://www.w3.org/standards/xml/components Bindings in XForms for example, http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-xforms-20091020/#ui-binding-examples http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-xforms-20091020/#ui-binding-ex...
kybernetyk 11y ago
Wasn't XAML deprecated some time ago? (Sorry, I'm out of the loop with Windows development).
- carey 11y ago
  I am too, but maybe you're thinking of Windows Presentation Framework? XAML files are still used to describe user interfaces in whatever they're calling Metro these days.
- bztzt 11y ago
  no, but they've introduced a bunch of versions of it under different names (WPF, Silverlight, Phone Silverlight, WinRT XAML, UWP), a few of which broke compatibility, so that's probably where you got that impression.
mwcampbell 11y ago
> Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft, where we're using XAML to build the Windows Shell. This is off-topic, but I have a question about the Windows 10 shell. You previously said that the new XAML-based part of the shell is written in C++/CX. Why not C#? Is the performance and/or memory footprint of the .NET Framework still not good enough, even with .NET Native?
oldmanjay 11y ago
I've seen comments followed by inappropriate disclaimers a bit recently, so I'm going to go all old man here and let you know that a disclaimer is a statement denying something, not a statement of credentials. I'm not sure what single catchy word you want here, but that's not it.
- throwawaykf05 11y ago
  I think the word most people are looking for in these cases is "disclosure", in that they want to "disclose" their affiliation so that readers are aware of potential biases in their views.
  - Gigablah 11y ago
    Yeah typically it would be "full disclosure". Or maybe the poster is just being self-deprecating :p
StillBored 11y ago
Except that XAML itself is just the XML friendly way to describe what traditionally was done by a resource fork. Yah, sure its got a few new tricks, but in that regards its just another all that is old is new again. In that it basically serializes the CLR where as the old resource fork serialized the windows API. For another example see the delphi DFM....

pjmlp 11y ago

XAML is great, that is what XHTML should have become if browser vendors played ball. Oh well.

nerraga 11y ago
Source? I always took XHTML to be an effort to make html into a stricter more parse-friendly format. Xhtml lets you use an xml parser to pull apart a page rather than having to deal with some kind of markup tag soup (which also makes it a great target for tooling within an IDE). XAML is concerned with layouts and binding in ways that, I don't believe, were ever intended for Xhtml. I could be wrong but they've always seemed to be worlds apart.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  That is what many that didn't bother to learn the specification thought. Quote (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#why http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#why) Document developers and user agent designers are constantly discovering new ways to express their ideas through new markup. In XML, it is relatively easy to introduce new elements or additional element attributes. The XHTML family is designed to accommodate these extensions through XHTML modules and techniques for developing new XHTML-conforming modules (described in the XHTML Modularization specification). These modules will permit the combination of existing and new feature sets when developing content and when designing new user agents. Quote (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq): If your document is just pure XHTML 1.0 (not including other markup languages) then you will not yet notice much difference. However as more and more XML tools become available, such as XSLT for tranforming documents, you will start noticing the advantages of using XHTML. XForms for instance will allow you to edit XHTML documents (or any other sort of XML document) in simple controllable ways. Semantic Web applications will be able to take advantage of XHTML documents. The old HTML behaviors would be achieved by XML stylesheets, rendering into HTML4 or XML events. There were then a plethora of standards planned to augment XHTML with application level. http://www.w3.org/standards/xml/components http://www.w3.org/standards/xml/components Bindings in XForms for example, http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-xforms-20091020/#ui-binding-examples http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-xforms-20091020/#ui-binding-ex...

kybernetyk 11y ago

Wasn't XAML deprecated some time ago? (Sorry, I'm out of the loop with Windows development).

carey 11y ago
I am too, but maybe you're thinking of Windows Presentation Framework? XAML files are still used to describe user interfaces in whatever they're calling Metro these days.
bztzt 11y ago
no, but they've introduced a bunch of versions of it under different names (WPF, Silverlight, Phone Silverlight, WinRT XAML, UWP), a few of which broke compatibility, so that's probably where you got that impression.

mwcampbell 11y ago

> Disclaimer: I work at Microsoft, where we're using XAML to build the Windows Shell. This is off-topic, but I have a question about the Windows 10 shell. You previously said that the new XAML-based part of the shell is written in C++/CX. Why not C#? Is the performance and/or memory footprint of the .NET Framework still not good enough, even with .NET Native?

oldmanjay 11y ago

I've seen comments followed by inappropriate disclaimers a bit recently, so I'm going to go all old man here and let you know that a disclaimer is a statement denying something, not a statement of credentials. I'm not sure what single catchy word you want here, but that's not it.

throwawaykf05 11y ago
I think the word most people are looking for in these cases is "disclosure", in that they want to "disclose" their affiliation so that readers are aware of potential biases in their views.
- Gigablah 11y ago
  Yeah typically it would be "full disclosure". Or maybe the poster is just being self-deprecating :p

StillBored 11y ago

Except that XAML itself is just the XML friendly way to describe what traditionally was done by a resource fork. Yah, sure its got a few new tricks, but in that regards its just another all that is old is new again. In that it basically serializes the CLR where as the old resource fork serialized the windows API. For another example see the delphi DFM....