Fri, 19 Mar 2004 01:15:21 +0100
I did not mean to do _everything_ in glade.
But stuff like setting the Visibility and Invisible Char in Glade
is one thing. Generating e.g. columns for a TreeView or such is better
done in the code. I also did not mean to force people to use glade.
It was more intended to people who are undecided yet. I'm sorry if
that sounded a little harsh.
I do think that Glade+mono makes a damn good RAD environment.
The flexibility was meant to address the *redesign the gui while keeping
the signals constant. This can be done very easily with glade, wich
was what was meant by flexibility.
On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 20:36, Richard Torkar wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 00:54 +0100, Moritz Angermann wrote:
> > Why doing that at all?
> > these are properties from glade.
> > IMHO I think we should try to focus primary on glade. And not write a
> > huge amount of GUI code by hand. That just cuts flexibility in a great
> > way.
> You say "That just cuts flexibility[...]", what if people _want_
> flexibility to code it by hand? You're assuming that all people do every
> GUI-related thing in glade? That's not flexibility, that's forcing
> people to do it in a certain way.
> Don't missunderstand me now. I use glade for almost everything I do, but
> I also like to go "into" the code and "fix" minor things sometimes.
> Having a _sane_ name on the property makes the code more readable.
> Gtk-sharp-list maillist - Gtkemail@example.com
---------------- contact info ----------------
Moritz Angermann firstname.lastname@example.org
Mobile +49 (0) 160 9197 5880
Home +49 (0) 4322 75 12 66