How big are your widgets ...

[Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com>]

Hi Maciej,

	I don't disagree with the purpose of creating the repository BTW,
it's just that I don't see 'There exist big widgets' as a good argument
for it. I think gnome-calculator should be a control; perhaps gtk-clock
and we should expose them only in that way. It clearly doesn't make sense
to make every widget a control.

On 30 Mar 2000, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> As Nat and I both mentioned, while the simple mechanics of embedding a   
> control are extremely easy, exposing a custom widget API for a
> component and also accessing this API from the client are not.

	Ahh, well the custom API ( if it is property based ) will be
simple to create using plain C. I'm also dithering about mapping gtk
signals to CORBA. At the end of the day the real problem is the lack of
introspection into non-signal Gtk virtual functions; I can see no easy way
to make these network transparent; can you ?

	Then again, I see no easy way to make them 'component library'
transparent either so again no win from not using Bonobo.

> If I want to create a list or table type widget, having the API
> exposed is the whole point; simple geometric embedding solves only a
> very small part of the problem of using this widget as a component.

	I agree.

> >     b) Bonobo Controls equate to Gtk Widgets and are easy to use
>
> I disbelieve.

	Hmm; they equate as much as can be expected. How about that, and
they are getting easier to use by the minute. My problem is mainly I
suppose that I can't see how you can achieve any better linkage to these
component libraries than bonobo will provide shortly.

	Regards,

		Michael.

-- 
 mmeeks@gnu.org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot