Re: Question about Glade vs no Glade

Jan Hudec <bulb ucw cz> writes:

As for your second question, I think that using Glade is the
only way to go. Others will disagree with me. But using Glade
means that you've got more time for actual coding, and also that
modifications are much easier - especially when you're building
complicated forms, and *especially* if someone else has to
modify your creation.

maybe do one save some time when prototyping a GUI, but when you'd
to change sg, you'll have to change it everywhere whereas with
real code, you can factorize common stuff (compare with HTML+CSS
or LaTeX against HTML as found in most web pages)

thus you eventually loose time while maintaining your application
and it may be error prone (eg: one forget to update a place).

Yes, it might be a problem, sometimes. The key to this is full use
of possibilities glade allows. I especialy mean binding signal
handlers and also custom naming of widgets. That way layout changes
don't need to touch perl code and functionality changes do not need
to touch the glade file (no, I never use the default handler names
-- the handler name should be derived from what it does and not what
widget it is bound to).

you still have to change layout everywhere when eg you switch from old
frame to new HIG blocks with bold title and left border in the logical

in perl, you could have a function create_block(@widgets) that create
either a frame or vbox with a bold title at top: when following new
HIG releases, you would only have to look at one place whereas with
glade files, you've to manually alter all dialogs in all xml files

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