Re: [Banshee-List] Glade Squashing Day

["Michael Hutchinson" <m j hutchinson gmail com>]

On Feb 11, 2008 8:36 PM, Gabriel Burt <gabriel burt gmail com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2008 7:32 PM, Scott Peterson <lunchtimemama gmail com> wrote:
> > For the record, what is the project's attitude toward stetic?
>
> I haven't really used Stetic in a project, so can't speak to it other
> than where it is the same as Glade.  My personal opinion is that Glade
> is great for doing UI mockups, but more pain and indirection than it's
> worth.

The advantage of Stetic over glade is that it has pretty tight
GTK#/Mono integration -- you can create GTK# widgets
(http://monodevelop.com/Creating_custom_widgets_with_MonoDevelop), use
hand-written widgets from stetic, and stetic-created widgets from
hand-written code. It uses code generation to build the widgets*, so
there's no runtime parsing and binding. It can import glade files, can
target different GTK# versions, and handles redirecting translatable
strings through a gettext implementation of your choice.

There are of course many places where it's easier to write the code by
hand, but for dialogs and widgets that have a lot of Table/VBox/HBox
layout (e.g. MonoDevelop's settings panels) it's invaluable.

*we recommend committing the generated files to SCM so that
developers/packagers etc don't need MonoDevelop.

-- 
Michael Hutchinson
http://mjhutchinson.com