discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: StepBox v1.2


From: copal
Subject: Re: StepBox v1.2
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 19:53:13 -0600

you seem to have taken my email the wrong way - i wasn't arguing, nor was i intentionally being snippy with you. you indicated that you're WM wouldn't have several of the things i listed, which left only a WindowManager and Client class in the list, so i responded based on that.

i apologize if any bitterness came through, but i have a distaste for the re-invention of any wheel, especially one that i might has well have carved out of solid granite with my teeth. i scoured the earth (and web) for a window manager written in objective-c, and upon finding nothing, i wrote interface - for the GNUstep community. true, it's not on par with WindowMaker at the moment, but it won't come any closer if others duplicate the effort and ask questions that have already been answered at the expense of a lot of my own time. if the GNUstep community is to have a fully functional window manager, the best thing for us to do would be to combine our efforts, rather than compete (lest we end up with a VIM vs. EMACS situation :-)


On Oct 29, 2003, at 10:47 AM, MJ Ray wrote:

copal <address@hidden> wrote:
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.

I agree with this, but I disagree with your decomposition. It is not worth arguing over this now, as jewel-objc is still vapour. I was asked whether
I had looked at IWM and I answered. Sorry if you don't like my opinion,
but it is my opinion and I don't know why you bothered to ask if you are
going to be upset by it. We do not plan jewel to have only two classes,
so please stop arguing based on guesses. I purposely don't say much of the
plan, as it is not yet worthy of argument.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]