[Glade-devel] Binding independent names

[bighead@users.sourceforge.net]

Hey

Well the point I think John is making is certainly holds a bit of truth.
The UI names are a lot C centric where as while most of the old people might
use python/C#/ruby etc they have used C before. But some of the new league of 
programmers don't even touch C (kinda unfortuanate :(, but I myself was
suprised when it I overheard a kid say so at Gnome Summit NYC)

Also Paolo's point stands, which I state more as, "" I can't believe we're
arguing over such a small detail!!! "". If you feel the need, submit a generic
patch (this is for John, and generic as in for most languages not just python)
:-D and we'll review. until then I think none of the main guys wants to change
it .. so a courteous and non-offensive :P

Cheers!
Archit Baweja

"John (J5) Palmieri" <johnp@martianrock.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 14:15, Paolo Borelli wrote:
> <snip>
> > 
> > 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() ).
> 
> It take a couple of clicks.  What would be nice would be for the most
> common event to be assumed and all you do it type in the event callback
> which would also be autofilled as it is now.  That is a seperate issue
> though.
> 
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> In the signal TreeView you would have both (verbage is just an example):
> 
> HBox for Gtk Signals:
> ...
> HBox for Foo Signals:
> ...
> 
> as opposed to
> 
> GtkHBox Signals:
> ...
> FooHBox Signals:
> ...
> 
> > > 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.
> 
> Well we just did here a complaint from a user who programs in Python and
> got a bit confused.
> 
> > Another thing to mention is the also on the first page of the Editor
> > "Class:" contains GtkWindow.
> 
> This is where I suggested adding the Package dropdown. So 
> 
> Class: GtkWindow
> 
> Would become
> 
> Package: Gtk \/
> Class: Window
> 
> Not many people edit this so complexity is a moot point.  It doesn't
> realy change anything but does make it more generic and less C binding
> centric.
> 
> > 
> > I really think we are arguing over a detail...
> 
> I don't know if arguing is the right word.  I agree that it isn't all
> that important but the topic was brought up so I thought I would share
> my views.  The details are realy important however as people might not
> rabidly complain about it but it is still a consitency issue.  Splitting
> package and class solves that issue without adding all that much
> complexity.  In fact I belive it clears things up for those who are not
> part of the super C coder club (Those who can redily apply OO tequniques
> to a procedural language :-) It also cuts down on verbosity in the
> interface.  How many times do I have to see Gtk first when all I want is
> a Window?  I just see it as a good middleground between having Glade
> become language sensitive or making alternitive language programmers
> fell like they are second class citizens.  
> 
> Anyway I don't have time to program it right now so I'm not going to
> care much one way or another.  If somone sees my posts and says hey this
> is a good idea and easy to do, then all the better.  At the point Glade
> gets integrated into Scaffold and I have time I might just write a patch
> and see how people like it :-)  So I leave it to the experts to decide
> for now.
> 
> --
> J5
> 
> > 
> > ciao
> > 	paolo
> _______________________________________________
> Glade-devel maillist  -  Glade-devel@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/glade-devel