Re: glade code generation

[Chema Celorio <chema ximian com>]

On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 08:38, Bill Haneman wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 14:36, Michael Meeks wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 11:51, Bill Haneman wrote:
> > > > 	But why don't you think it would be a good idea ... ?
...
> (1) replace the current main() with a slightly modified one that calls
> libglade;
> 
> (2) suppress generation of interface.c;
> (3) glance at callbacks.c to make sure it's good coding style and    
>     compatible with libglade handlers (I think it is).
> (4) adjust the rest of the PROJECT stuff to remove interface.c and
>     include the libglade dependency.

Given that we don't want to touch that code on a intrusive way, I think
the big annoying dialog is a better option than rewriting the code, also
I doubt anybody will volunteer to do a rewrite of that code.

As much as I hate code generation I've had to use it a couple of times
(granted, for not so valid reasons) and some people will still want to
do the evil thing that will hunt them back, also it can be used to learn
gtk+ in a way that probably nobody can suggest with a straight face.

I would rewrite your list with:

1. Create a patch for glade to display a big *annoying* dialog, with a
message in the lines of:
"If you want to disable this dialog you have to set and env variable
found in http://www.gnome.org/.../why_code_generation_is_evil.html";.
2. Create why_code_generation_is_evil.html based on owen's mail
3. Release a new glade

I volunteer to do 1 & 2, but not 3. Who has been doing glade releases?

regards,
Chema

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers