[Gtk-sharp-list] Ways of supporting complex data binding in TreeView

Todd Berman tberman at off.net
Sat May 28 04:57:57 EDT 2005

On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 01:45 -0700, Chas wrote:
> > Those 3 seem like truely important solvable issues,
> > data binding doesn't
> > seem hard at all, especially if you can implement
> > GInterfaces in C#.
> I have no argue with that. Still, I find data-binding
> is an important feature because it can save a lot of
> code & time in many cases and many people are 
> expecting it from a .Net GUI toolkit.
> And so, I think some solution should be integrated to
> Gtk# if possible. That is why I am asking for your
> opinion and  not just implementing a TreeModel that
> fits my project alone. Granted, it'd not be 100%
> managed but still the benefit would outweigh the cost
> Do you think such a feature cannot be integrated to
> Gtk# before the 3 issues you've mentioned are solved,
> or do you just not see it as a priority?

The ability to implement GInterfaces and override virtual methods would
absolutely help with implementing a pure C# TreeModel implementation to
allow for nice and easy data-binding. However, it would still be
possible w/o it. You can actually look at the gtk# source for a
TreeModel implementation (NodeStore). One issue if you look at
NodeStore, is that the managed bit doesn't implement TreeModel, and this
ends up creating a lot of interesting issues, like the requirement of
NodeSelection, NodeCellDataFunc, and (somewhat) NodeView...

I think all of it is a priority, but I absolutely think that working to
allow *all* GInterface implementations gives you a lot more than writing
one-off hacks to implement a single GInterface once...


More information about the Gtk-sharp-list mailing list