Re: Minutes of the GTK+ Team Meeting - 2008-09-23

[Christian Dywan <christian imendio com>]

Am Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:20:35 +0300
schrieb "Vlad Grecescu" <b100dian gmail com>:

> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com>
> wrote:
> > = minutes for the 2008-09-23 meeting =
> >
> > * Deprecate the H/V split and add orientation instead
> > + mitch has a patch deprecating all the H/V classes
> > + adds a constructor for base classes
> > + defaults can be fixed
> > + subclassing is easier
> > + change orientation at runtime
> > + massive deprecation at branch for 2.90
> > + everyone agrees
> 
> Hello,
> Just because you can make the base class easier to subclass (e.g. Box
> without HBox and VBox) doesn't mean you should get rid of the two
> specializations. you just have to inline, for each gtk_vbox_ method
> the gtk_box_ one
> 
> Plus, its a verbosity thing: I like having <VBox> and <HBox> around
> when using Flex or XUL as much I preffer having them in Gtkaml i'm
> making. (instead of <Box orientation='horizontal'>)
> 
> To put it in another way: don't let over-generalization stump on
> easyness of use. Do both:)

I don't see how a box is special compared to labels, buttons, toolbars
or any other widgets that can support different angles or orientation
modes. It's nothing more than a flawed decision that was made a long
time ago to me.
Whenever you have a reason to differentiate widgets based on
significant features, you can subclass them. If, for you, orientation
happens to be important enough, go for it. But I personally don't think
it generally benefits most people.

The burden of rewriting code towards Gtk 3.0 is something else that I
do see as an issue. I for one would rather locally introduce functions
that emulate legacy widgets than maintaining two versions of my code
for Gtk 2.0 and Gtk 3.0.
It might be helpful to actually write one such compatiblity layer that
projects can include, which either emulates HFoo and VFoo accessors or
provides gtk_foo_new style macros that fallback to legacy widgets.

In any case, I'm looking forward to switching the orientation of
widgets in one line, or a handful of lines if I need recursion.

ciao,
    Christian