[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: StepBox v1.2
Re: StepBox v1.2
Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:20:12 -0600
like i said, "weed through the code". once of the nicest things about
objective-c code is that the header files are almost books in and of
themselves. but if it's documents you want, i'll generate the
headerdocs right now and commit them under the Documents folder (which
is what i've meant to do for a while, and why i cleaned up some of the
headerdoc comments the other night).
on the topic of minimalism...IWM is, at it's core, very minimal.
you've got a client structure, with it's required decor (titlebar,
resizebar, close button, etc.), and a manager for said client
structure(s). the IWMIcon class may be a "convenience", but a
neccessary one, as people tend to prefer to not have thier workspace
completely cluttered with app windows that they can not hide or
minimize in some fashion. the rest is a slew of objects to manage X
primitive types (Window, Screen, Pixmap, etc.) and abstract away from
the mess that managing these types becomes.
sure, the inclusion of an external graphics library may be deemed
unnecessary to the creation of a fully functional window manager, but
i, myself, don't want to be responsible for a window manager that looks
like it's from the 80's, nor would i expect many people to use it (even
if it *is* written in objective-c).
you say "we do not have 2, 2, 4, 5 and 6 and I don't think we will"
(misnumbering my fault :-), but you *are* writing this WM in
objective-c, neh? one of the keys to OOP is identifying what
should/should not be an object, what tasks should/should not be
methods, and working from there. if you only have a window manager
class and a client class, you're going to end up with two very LARGE
classes, and one nasty mess. i'm not trying to piss on your effort by
any means, but i'm speaking from experience: IWM at one point had, i
think, 3 classes. X programming is very complicated (in a
this-really-sucks way), and there's a lot that goes into making even a
simple window manager. hell, i'm still stunned by how much i've had to
put into IWM just to get it to this point...
anyways - back to the headerdocs for everyone's enjoyment...
On Oct 29, 2003, at 2:18 AM, MJ Ray wrote:
copal <address@hidden> wrote:
the scheme is simple if you take time to weed through the code:
Why is it not in the docs? Anyway, your model seems quite different to
we have ended up. Basically, we do not have 2, 2, 4, 5 and 6 and I
think we will. Minimalism.
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
Re: StepBox v1.2, Yen-Ju Chen, 2003/10/27
Re: StepBox v1.2, Yen-Ju Chen, 2003/10/29