Re: [Setup-tool-hackers] Arrrggg, a better solution forETableSpecification...

[Tambet Ingo <tambet ximian com>]

On 26 May 2001 15:33:34 +0200, Carlos Perelló Marín wrote:

If only I was near to my computer that time...
First of all, xst-tool.c is the implementation (code) of XstTool object,
not place for helper functions (xst_load_etspec).

> Hello, I have found other solution for the split of the
> ETableSpecification XML code (Thanks to mrproject source code)
> 
> It use directly e_table_scrolled_new_from_spec_file that could load
> files to get the specifications, so we don't need our own function
> (xst_read_etspec) to load that file.
> 
> Also, we need to extract the ETableState code into a separate file.

No we don't. Look at the src/xst-ui.c how it's done. It's done with
using GAL functions and it also validates the spec file.

> I think that it's the best solution because it uses directly gal
> functions.

I agree that re-inveting wheel could be interesting but not neccecary.

> I will make a patch soon.

No need for that now, I fixed it. The right way is the right way! The
right way is the right way! The right way....

> 
> One thing, if we use those functions we will lost the option to store
> the xml data into gnome-conf.

No we don't.

Tambet


_______________________________________________
setup-tool-hackers maillist  -  setup-tool-hackers@ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/setup-tool-hackers