Replies: 3 comments 4 replies
-
uno.sdk extension increases Uno's learning cost。 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I referred to AvaloniaUI and my question is why Uno cannot perform Native AOT。 dotnet publish -r win-x64 -c Release -f net9.0-desktop |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I suggested this based on a better understanding. TFM (Example) net9.0 as a platform free definition, implements UI functionality based on SkiaSharp. native controls and non-native controls, platform and no platform. non-platform to implement cross platform framework be based on SkiaSharp The above are just suggestions, I just think this classification is easier to understand |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Uno is currently implemented in two ways
Why doesn't Uno use netx.x(netx.x-desktop Cross platform using SkiaSharp) and netx.x-browser (netx.x-browserwasm) to define
Determine the support for netstandard2.0 through SkiaSharp support.
The current extensions of netx.x-browserwasm and netx.x-desktop have increased the complexity of uno. At the same time, it is not friendly to the development of control libraries.
SkiaSharp has a lot of support for the platform, and they may overlap with native controls.
SkiaSharp (SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.Win32,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.macOS,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.Linux,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.WebAssembly,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.Android ,
SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.iOS,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.MacCatalyst,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.UWP,SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.Tizen,
SkiaSharp.NativeAssets.WinUI)
For future new systems, we can distinguish between using native controls or implementing them based on SkiaSharp, such as OpenHarmony
netx.x;netx.x-ios;netx.x-maccatalyst;netx.x-android;netx.x-windows10.0.26100;netx.x-browser
Isn't it better to name it this way
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions