Query: I wn complete seperate .css/.scss and .html template file for my webcomponent.js like in angular. But with complete security. In lit. Use any js lib like domPurify, etc. But I wan complete safety. How? ChatGPT said: Thought for 16s Totally doable. Here’s a secure Lit setup with fully separate .html + .scss files , sanitized with DOMPurify , and rendered into the Shadow DOM without sacrificing performance. Folder layout src / lib/ safe- html .js components/ app-shell .html app-shell .scss app-shell .js 1) Install deps npm i dompurify npm i -D sass Vite will compile .scss . We’ll import the compiled CSS as text and attach it via adoptedStyleSheets (fast + memory-friendly). 2) app-shell.html (pure template file) Put your Carbon UI Shell markup here (no scripts). Example stub: < cds-header aria-label = "My App" > < cds-header-name prefix = "IBM" >[Platform] </ cds-header-name > < cds-header-glo...
Here's a comparison of the GUI toolkits you mentioned, highlighting key features, pros, and cons:
**Toolkit | Key Features | Pros | Cons** |
---|---|---|---|
Enlightenment Foundation Libraries (EFL) | - Native look and feel - Comprehensive widget set - Built-in effects and animations - Advanced graphics capabilities | - Highly customizable - Modern and visually appealing interfaces - Efficient resource management | - Steeper learning curve - Smaller community and resources |
GTK | - Cross-platform - Widely adopted - Extensive widget set - Mature and well-supported | - Native look and feel on most platforms - Large community and resources - Good performance | - Can be less visually appealing out-of-the-box - Steeper learning curve for complex UIs |
IUP | - Cross-platform - Lightweight and efficient - Simple API - Multiple language bindings | - Easy to learn and use - Fast performance - Suitable for embedded systems | - Smaller widget set - Less customization options |
XForms | - Cross-platform - Model-view-controller architecture - Declarative UI definition - Designed for rapid development | - Easy to create complex UIs - Clear separation of concerns - Good for data-driven applications | - Less common and mature - Smaller community and resources |
XVT | - Cross-platform - Native look and feel - Comprehensive widget set - Mature and stable | - Consistent UI across platforms - Good performance - Wide range of widgets | - Proprietary license - Older codebase - Less active development |
Additional Considerations:
- Active Development: GTK and EFL have the most active development, while XForms and XVT are less actively maintained.
- Target Platforms: Consider the toolkit's support for your intended platforms (Windows, macOS, Linux, embedded systems).
- Community and Resources: GTK and EFL have larger communities and more resources available.
- Performance: IUP and XForms are generally known for their efficiency and speed.
- Ease of Use: IUP and XForms often have simpler APIs for basic UI creation.
- Customization: EFL and GTK offer more extensive customization options.
Best Choice: The ideal toolkit depends on your specific project requirements, preferences, and constraints. It's often helpful to experiment with different options to find the best fit.
Comments
Post a Comment
If you have any doubts, please let me know.