Re: [gtk-list] Re: Gnome/GtkCanvas (was Re: gtk_args_collect & gnome--)

On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Miguel de Icaza wrote:

> > I'd really like to see GnomeCanvas renamed to GtkCanvas now,
> > regardless of whether we move it before 1.2, or not, in the belief
> > that we eventually need to move it.
> I dislike the name change.  Think of the prefix as the "Foundry" that
> provided the code.  
> Just like the fonts in X, you dont go changing "Adobe-...-Courier" to
> "X-...-Courier" either.
> > Having it as GnomeCanvas but in GTK+, as well as being conceptually
> > ugly, will cause problems for language bindings - for instance,
> > in Perl, all of GTK lives in the Gtk:: module. Does GnomeCanvas
> > get separated out to Gnome:: or do people write:
> >  
> >  new Gtk::GnomeCanvas
> This should be fixed in the Gtk/Perl bindings, they should not be
> using Gtk::Gnome::Something (as it is the case right now), but rather,
> we need a new toplevel, like this:
>    new Gnome::Canvas

Please understand that this is "broken" intentionally. Perl has its own
namespace, and we cannot go stealing from that willy-nilly. For the
moment, Gnome is packed under Gtk, to keep matters simple.

It will make sense to take the Gnome tree, but I'm not sure what should go
in it: the Gnome portion of Gtk is purely a binding of Gnome's widgets,
and not the rest of the library. In addition the other hand, I'm not sure
the Perl archive mechanisms are capable of handling a package
(Gtk-*.tar.gz) that contains two top-level modules (Gtk::* and Gnome::*).

My intention at the moment is to gradually improve Gtk/Perl to the point
where other modules (such as Gnome, or whatever) can be linked in to an
existing Gtk/Perl installation without recompiling everything. At that
point, Gnome can become a separate Perl distribution including both Gtk
modules, and anything else relevant to Gnome/Perl.

Kenneth Albanowski (, CIS: 70705,126)

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]