[vtkusers] vtkFLTK project on SourceForge

[Sean McInerney]

   At the time that I initially undertook vtkFLTK, which was almost 15 
months ago, I was unable to get multiple VTK RenderWindows, separate 
from a main application interface window, to show() after a hide() 
without bringing down the X server. I do not think that 
vtkFlRenderWindowInteractor, at that time, had a way of reaquiring the 
new XID that it needed ... therfore, KABOOM! Searching through 
discussion of your work, however, seems to indicate that this problem is 
gone.

   Aside from any disqualifying reasons, I was also just interested in 
using VTK ObjectFactory facilities. The goal was the ability to use 
vtkFLTK without an application having to deal with anything other than 
the standard VTK base classes (Registration of the specialized 
ObjectFactory even occurs via static initializers behind the scenes). I 
also wanted a single inheritance based solution in order to maintain 
consistency with the current designs of VTK and FLTK. I will certainly 
say that multiple inheritance lends your solution an elegance not 
otherwise achievable.

   Basically, vtkFLTK came into existence at a time when 
vtkFlRenderWindowInteractor may have been doing a little teething of its 
own. There had been a small number of people who found vtkFLTK useful 
and I was encouraged to bring it forward, so voila! My intention was 
never to reinvent the wheel or to butt heads with anyone.

-Sean

Charl P. Botha wrote:
> Sean McInerney wrote:
> 
>>   For I variety of reasons, including diffucties with existing 
>> solutions, I was motivated to construct a bridge between VTK and FLTK 
>> event and window system handling. The result was 'vtkFLTK' and has 
>> been quite useful to me. The project is now all shaved and ready to go on 
> 
> 
> I would very much like to know which of those variety of reasons 
> disqualified http://cpbotha.net/vtkFlRenderWindowInteractor.html from 
> your consideration. :)  This is a proven solution that works on all 
> platforms and has been integrated into ITK.
> 
> Variety is always good of course, but I am still curious.
> 
> Thanks,
> Charl
>