Re: Common GUI API : What would the code look like?
John Meacham <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.haskell.gui |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
the widget name could just be another property, settable by whatever our standard get/set routines turn out to be. if 90% of toolkits ignore the name anyway, forcing a user to specify them always would probably result in people giving them meaningless names anyway if they don't know what they are for. we can probably generate somewhat useful names automatically. like button1..button3 for the first three children buttons of a given widget or whatnot... John On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 05:19:54AM +0000, Glynn Clements wrote: > > Nick Name wrote: > > > > 1. Widgets aren't being given names. This makes it impossible to refer > > > to them from outside of the code. It also eliminates the possibility > > > of implementing a useable Xt (e.g. Motif) backend. Toolkits which > > > don't name widgets can just ignore the name. > > > > Apart from the fact that I would like names for widget as an added > > comfort, why do you have to name widget to implement them in Xt? > > Couldn't you just use a unique string generator and wrap the names into > > an ADT? I apologize if the question is stupid. > > Well by "useable" [sic], I meant the ability to use resource files, > -xrm, Editres etc. Yes, you could implement an Xt backend, but using > automatically-generated widget names would significantly reduce its > functionality. > > -- > Glynn Clements <[email protected]> > _______________________________________________ > GUI mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/gui -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Meacham - California Institute of Technology, Alum. - [email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------