[Glade-devel] Binding independent names

[Paolo Borelli]

On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 19:53, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 12:49, Paolo Borelli wrote:
> <snip>
> > 
> > I also don't like the idea of stripping of the Gtk* namespace, since you
> > could have a loadable library that offers its FooHBox or whatever.
> > IMHO glade is the _GTK_ gui builder, so calling the Gtk widgets with
> > their name (GtkHBox etc) is just fine.
> 
> Well I didn't say stripping it.  I was more of the opinion of seperating
> it. So you have a dropdown list of packages to choose from and then a
> lookahead textbox that can predict what class you want from that
> package.  Archit's example on the tooltips "Window for GtkWindow" would
> just as simply be written "Window for Gtk".  Less verbose and keeps the
> meaning.  
> 

IMO adding one more widget (the dropdown) would make UI even more
painful: the user already has to go trough a lot of pointing and
clicking just to add a simple signal (as I said in another mail this
could well be one of the reasons why most of the projects prefer simply
using g_signal_connect() ).

Beside it would not work: FooHBox may have been subclassed from GtkHBox
so in the TreeView with the list of the signals you should have *both*
at the same time.

> We all might be programmers but if we want to make this easy for newbies
> flooding them with GtkWindow when they might be writting Gtk.Window
> might be confusing.  If you split them from the begining they get used
> to the fact that Gtk is actualy seperate from Window.  Gtk is a
> windowing toolkit package and Window is a class of that package.

It *might* be confusing... lets stick to the facts, Glade2 uses
GtkWindow since forever and I never heard a complain or a question.

Another thing to mention is the also on the first page of the Editor
"Class:" contains GtkWindow.


I really think we are arguing over a detail...


ciao
	paolo