Re: gtk2 or glade?

[David Alcobero <anguila gmail com>]

Yes, the question was there. But, in glade you can put the signals,
the position of the widgets, the positions of the windows, the widgets
and all. And you only should put the code that you want to do the
signal of the widgets, and this isn't glade, is (in this case) perl
code, not gtk2 code. So it's worth learning gtk2 if glade generate all
code for you? This is the question that i should said.


On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:04:10 -0400, muppet <scott asofyet org> wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2004, at 7:08 PM, David Alcobero wrote:
>
> > I have one question:
> > What's better, programming with gtk2 writing every lines of the code
> > or use glade? What aventages and disaventages have both?  It's worth
> > writing gtk2 code?
>
> first, to make sure we're on the same page, you don't want to generate
> code with glade, you want to use libglade (Gtk2::GladeXML) to load the
> gui description on the fly.
>
> secondly, i think the answer to the question you actually asked is
> incredibly subjective.  instead i'll answer the related question,
> "should i start with Gtk2::GladeXML or by learning the gtk+ api and
> building things 'by hand'?" to which the answer is a resounding "learn
> the API first, then start using glade."
>
> the reasoning is very simple: libglade is meant to automate tedious and
> repetitive gui-building code, but not to replace it.  you will still
> have to grab widgets and do setup that glade couldn't do for you, so
> you have to know how it all works anyway.
>
> --
> "the ternary operator makes it a bit less ugly."
>      -- kaffee



-- 
La puerta mejor cerrada es aquella que se puede dejar abierta.