Re: ANN: GWorkspace 0.6.5

[Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf]

pjb@informatimago.com wrote on 07.06.2004 17:30:27:

> Enrico Sersale writes:
> > On 2004-06-06 21:10:32 +0300 Nicolas Roard <nicolas@roard.com> wrote:
> > > It works well... But why did you split GWorkspace in so many
> > > applications ?
> > The main split is GWorkspace <-> Desktop. But, doing this, I've had
> > to split also Inspector and Operation because they are used by both
> > the two "main" apps.
> > Finder is an other thing: it is all new code and it has been easier
> > for me to think it as a unit. And I take the occasion to explain an
> > other cause that is behind this split: GWorkspace is four years old
> > and, even if it works very well, some parts have been written when I
> > was new to Objective-C and -gui was a disaster. So, I want to
> > rewrite about all; and I think that you know that, in many cases, to
> > rewrite is easier than to try to patch ugly code...
> > To do this withouth breaking anything, I've choosen to work
> > rewriting little elements.
> > Probably, at the end of this task, some parts will become again a
> > single app.
> 
> Or perhaps not. An advantage of having separate applications is that
> it may be easier to change one module.  But for that you need to
> document the IPC between these colaborating applications.

Let me chime in here. I must also confess that i like the modular approach 
more than the monolithic approach. Things are easier to exchange if you 
don't like several parts and also easier to replace, since you won't need 
to write a whole WorkspaceManager, if you don't like - for instance - the 
desktop part.

The modular approach is also very UNIX like where traditionally many small 
pieces make up the whole system (remember that "If UNIX was a plane" - 
joke? There is some truth in it - for good) In contrast there is Windows 
where you even can't replace the webbrowser or the mediaplayer easily. 
please keep that in mind :-)

> 
> 
> -- 
> __Pascal_Bourguignon__ 

regards, Lars