4

I am looking for a cross platform gui library that can be used to create dialog boxes, that must fit the following requirements:

  1. Be written in C or C++.

  2. Be compatible with at least Windows, Mac and Linux.

  3. Be relatively mature.

  4. Be under a license that does not require Copyright text in the documentation of derivative works distributed in compiled form. Examples of good licenses would be the Zlib/libpng license, the Boost software license and of course public domain. Unusable licenses include LGPL, BSD, MIT etc.

Does anyone have any tips?

Kind regards,

Philip Bennefall

Philip Bennefall
  • 1,477
  • 5
  • 20
  • 33
  • See this one: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5248105/gui-library-for-beginner-c-programmer/5248119#5248119 – Morten Kristensen Jun 19 '11 at 15:15
  • 2
    You're ignoring the wealth of BSD- and MIT-licensed code because you don't want to have to compile in a plain text copyright notice? All they ask is that you give credit where credit is due, but it sounds like you want to use the work of others while claiming it is your own. – Bryan Oakley Jun 19 '11 at 15:24
  • 1
    Why are you against distributing license/copyright texts? Aren't those just text files anyway? – rubenvb Jun 19 '11 at 15:34
  • I am not sure if my previous attempt to answer the questions here went through so am trying again. My intention is certainly not to try and claim the work of others as my own. I mostly write middleware, which means that my end users would have to include a boatload of legal text in their final applications just because I use certain components internally. I definitely give credit where credit is due (e.g. in the documentation for my own software), but I don't want to force end users of my middleware to include tons of disclaimers and Copyright terms just because of what I use internally. – Philip Bennefall Jun 19 '11 at 16:16
  • 1
    IANAL, but it was always my assumption that BSD and MIT were not viral. That is, if you use BSD or MIT code in your code, _you_ must acknowledge that, but if you make a derivative work, those that use your product don't necessarily have to carry that forward. All I know for certain is that all software licenses are hard to fully understand. My personal motto is to avoid anything even loosely tied to GPL, just as their are those with the opinion one should avoid anything *not* tied to the GPL. – Bryan Oakley Jun 19 '11 at 16:25
  • @Bryan Oakley: If the third party in this case is still "redistributing in binary form" the BSD-licensed code, then clauses 2 and 3 of the 3-clause BSD license still apply to them. You can't launder away copyright. – caf Jun 20 '11 at 02:07

2 Answers2

8

I'd go with wxwidgets. According to the license it it essentially LGPL with the following exception that applies to your question:

  1. The exception is that you may use, copy, link, modify and distribute under your own terms, binary object code versions of works based on the Library.
Bryan Oakley
  • 370,779
  • 53
  • 539
  • 685
JoeSlav
  • 4,479
  • 4
  • 31
  • 50
  • 1
    wxwidgets license is "essentially the L-GPL (Library General Public Licence)" which requires that you "conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice". The question specifically excludes any license that requires you provide copyright text. – Bryan Oakley Jun 19 '11 at 15:28
  • 1
    .."with an exception stating that derived works in binary form may be distributed on the user's own terms." – JoeSlav Jun 19 '11 at 15:31
  • 1
    Only one I know of that lets you distribute apps without a copyright notice or accompanying license text. – rubenvb Jun 19 '11 at 15:35
  • Ah, I was not aware of this. This is great news, as WxWidgets is extremely well known and has a huge user base. Thanks! – Philip Bennefall Jun 19 '11 at 16:18
0

How about the Fast Light Toolkit (FLTK)?

Cody Gray - on strike
  • 239,200
  • 50
  • 490
  • 574
Chawathe Vipul S
  • 1,636
  • 15
  • 28