5 ms·

How to design a platform-independent UI framework?

5 points by CodeVisio 2y ago

I've been working on a hobby project, a UI framework, much like QT, SwiftUI, UIKit, WPF and alike, in my spare time. I haven't planned to do it professionally and it is not meant to become one, it is just for my personal experimentation. Currently it is on a very early stage and I'm developing it under Windows, but it is meant to be multiplatform. So the backend for rendering could be skia, vulkan, directx etc. The language I'm developing it, C++, is not much relevant for my questions. The responsibility of handling all UI controls or widgets is mine and it abstracts from the host-native Window. Once the hierarchy of UI widgets are built and rendered, what is left, is the interaction with the user. The problem I'm facing now is how to handle the mouse, keyboard, touch, hover, capture, focus events, how to bubble them up, and how to design the UI widgets hierarchy to handle all of them in a clean way. The solution I came up with is not clean and that rings a bell in my mind that something is not right. Beside the host (or platform dependent) window, at the top I have a Window class that handle all the widgets in a parent-child way relationship (a three) and then I have widget class for the default cases. Every other UI controls derive from the widget class. Furthermore, there will be widgets that have visual appearance, as well as widgets that helps laying out other widgets but not necessarily do they have a visual representation. So subdividing classes, in my case in C++, is fundamental to avoid repeating code and to have a clean scalable architecture. I gave a look at other open source projects but I couldn't find any simplified one. Chromium, for example that is used in web apps, is huge one and it would take a while before I could even find what is responsible for what. Firefox I feel is at the same level. Are there any documentation or open source projects to have look at? Thanks

HelloNurse 2y ago
> the backend for rendering could be skia, vulkan, directx etc. It doesn't really matter, these are just ways to draw into a native window and not the backend that owns that window. > Once the hierarchy of UI widgets are built and rendered, what is left, is the interaction with the user. Without interaction they aren't UI widgets, but merely organized graphics. You are only considering the easy, portable part of a GUI. > I gave a look at other open source projects but I couldn't find any simplified one. Consider the Windows API functions that deal with the GUI: they are comprehensive (particularly with respect to handling input and events), reasonably low level and more mature than anything you can design. If you want to do more, layering something portable on top of them and on top of similar libraries for other platforms, the end product will be more complex, not simple (or naively "simplified"). I suggest Dear IMGUI and Qt as good case studies of opposite approaches: forfeiting platform specific and advanced features in order to simplify the user's job, or adding to native libraries whatever it takes to do everything well and in the same way on all platforms without reducing complexity. Test question: what do you want to do for assistive technology?
- CodeVisio 2y ago
  >It doesn't really matter, these are just ways to draw into a native window and not the backend that owns that window. I know. I mentioned them because I wanted to give a bit of context. >Without interaction they aren't UI widgets, but merely organized graphics. You are only considering the easy, portable part of a GUI. Again, I know. >Consider the Windows API functions that deal with the GUI: they are comprehensive (particularly with respect to handling input and events), >reasonably low level and more mature than anything you can design. For sure they have been maintained for a long time but if you have followed the development of the basic ones (edit, checkboxes, combos etc) and the common control ones (listview, treeeview) etc, you should have known how much they are a pin in the ass when it comes to customize them (owner drawn and custom drawn). They were never updated by Microsoft but only extended. QT, for example, took the opposite side as an approach. Everything is stretchable by default. The trend nowadays is to use some sort of chromium embedded engine and building upon that your programs or web apps with CSS&HTML&JS. Now, the fact that we have tons of RAMS, TBs of hard disks, and missiles as CPUs doesn't justify to have a more than 100GB of desktop program just to say "Hello World!" >I suggest Dear IMGUI and Qt... Dear ImGUI is more appropriate for games logic than for desktop programs. QT has GBs of DLL you have to bring with you just to say, again, Hello World. Additionally, you have to follow a university course to understand their policy regarding licences. For desktop programs there is no need for a retained mode approach. I would consider both: a GUI you can build from an xml-alike file and by interacting with objects. >what do you want to do for assistive technology? I didn't get it. What do you mean exactly? A similar question like mine: https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/1eek3a5/what_would_you_want_to_have_in_an_ui_library/?rdt=55661 https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/1eek3a5/what_would_you...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - HelloNurse 2y ago
    Do you intend to support screen readers, voice input etc. with not very portable complex technology or to leave behind disabled end users for the sake of "simplicity" and portability? More generally, what do you plan to do better than current multiplatform GUI libraries? A clear value proposition is necessary.
dtagames 2y ago
Web components are bare metal standard stuff that works on all devices. You could use Lit as a small shim for reactive rendering. That way, you can create your component library with nearly zero dependencies and yet use it in desktop-equivalent apps (via Electron or distribute as a web app).
- CodeVisio 2y ago
  If I got it right, does your solution assume a web engine of some sort behind the scenes?
  - dtagames 2y ago
    No. In fact, the whole goal is to stay as close to "bare metal" as possible without any dependencies other than the browser (and Lit). I wrote an article[0] about this that you might find helpful. [0] https://medium.com/gitconnected/getting-started-with-web-components-lit-part-1-911aa7058e9b https://medium.com/gitconnected/getting-started-with-web-com...
_f9cu 2y ago
Right question. The answer you seek you will get on your own. How many years have you been chasing it?
duped 2y ago
> I gave a look at other open source projects but I couldn't find any simplified one Because there is no simple approach to this. > Are there any documentation or open source projects to have look at? Qt and JUCE are very mature and have the same architecture you're describing. > at the top I have a Window class that handle all the widgets in a parent-child way relationship Don't marry yourself to this architecture or else it's going to be a pain to support multiple windows or cases where the application does not own the window or its lifecycle.