The Future of Tk?

[Martin Ambuhl]

"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
> 
> In article <371E964F.C531C2A at istar.ca>,
> Eugene Dragoev  <eugened at istar.ca> wrote:
> > Is there going to be any Tk implementation that will continue using
> > lightweight components?

Other than comp.lang.tcl, where this should be topical, and comp.lang.c, where
it definitely is not, I have no idea which of the other 4 of the 6 groups give a
tinker's damn about this.  

I have reset the followups to this message as comp.lang.tcl.  Please do
something similar in your subsequent postings.

Please stop the inane childish massive crossposting.  If you want to be known as
unwelcome antisocial polluters of other newsgroups, why don't you just join the
Meow group?

In case you can't understand the above: Take this junk out of the newsgroups
where it does not belong.  Think before you you start another idiotic
crosspost.  Despite what you might think, usenet is divided into newsgroups for
a reason.




-- 
Martin Ambuhl (mambuhl at earthlink.net)
Note: mambuhl at tiac.net will soon be inactive