Re: GtkBuilder Public API - Last call

[Tristan Van Berkom <tvb gnome org>]

On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 10:57 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Kalle Vahlman wrote:
> > 2007/6/13, Matthias Clasen <matthias clasen gmail com>:
> >   
> >> On 6/13/07, Yevgen Muntyan <muntyan tamu edu> wrote:
> >>     
> >>>> Widgets which set a name in a constructor are already semi-broken
> >>>> anyway. Widget names are supposed to be an application/user feature,
> >>>> not something thats used in the implementation of a widget.
> >>>>         
> >>> Programmers are also not supposed to set style properties. Nevertheless
> >>> it happens, and widget name is one of tools for that. It is a documented
> >>> use which shouldn't break, isn't it?

Sure programmers are supposed to set style properties, in thier custom
gtkrc that they distribute with thier app in thier custom environment.
its just not something people generally do in "the desktop" world, which
is just one popular use case of gtk+, but gtk+ is not the desktop, and
skinning your widgets by name is an important feature of gtk+.

> >>> How do you draw the line between "implementation of a widget" and
> >>> "an application" part exactly? Note that what you said makes it look
> >>> like calling gtk_widget_set_name() by a widget implementation is
> >>> not supposed to happen; while doing it by GtkBuilder is indeed right
> >>> and good; is it quite logical? GtkBuilder is more a user than the widget?
> >>>       
> >> GtkBuilder is just setting the name that was specified in the xml, so
> >> it is not violating the principle that the widget name belongs to the
> >> app/user, since
> >> the xml is part of the app.
> >>     
> 
> And widget isn't part of the app? Such separation is meaningless for
> purpose of answering the question "should we change code of given
> widget if we want the widget to be usable with GtkBuider?"

libglade set the widget name according to the name specified in the xml,
afaics so does the builder right ? so how does the bulder differ from
how libglade did it and where is the breakage ?

Cheers,
                -Tristan