Re: Suggestion... or just a thought
Andy Robinson
> Have you ever thought about leaving wxWidgets at its current stage and
> basing on in starting a new API using all the modern features C++ and other
> languages offer (exceptions, stl etc.), using design patterns and
> redesigning all the classes (at least function names - they are so different
> in different classes that it is sometime imposible to code without open
> manual). Of course this new library won't be compatible with wxWidgets but
> it will definitelly be better.
It would be a huge amount of work for exactly how much benefit? You can
already use stl and personally I don't think that wx would be improved
by having it throw exceptions. As for design patterns and name changes,
these can be applied in the existing wx where beneficial. And AFAIK
there's never been a substantial API for anything, that you could use
without consulting the manual.
Regards,
Andy Robinson, Seventh String Software, www.seventhstring.com
Julian Smart
>Have you ever thought about leaving wxWidgets at its current stage and
>basing on in starting a new API using all the modern features C++ and other
>languages offer (exceptions, stl etc.), using design patterns and
>redesigning all the classes (at least function names - they are so different
>in different classes that it is sometime imposible to code without open
>manual). Of course this new library won't be compatible with wxWidgets but
>it will definitelly be better.
>And wxWidgets still will be available in current version - maybe even
>someone will still develop it.
This describes wxTNG ('The Next Generation'). As usual, there is the will
but not a lot of resources for rewriting wxWidgets.
See wx-discuss archive for more.
Regards,
Julian
Paul
"cbull" <cb...@poczta.onet.pl> wrote in message
news:e0dtnh$eui$1...@nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
> Have you ever thought about leaving wxWidgets at its current stage and
> basing on in starting a new API using all the modern features C++ and
other
> languages offer (exceptions, stl etc.), using design patterns and
> redesigning all the classes (at least function names - they are so
different
> in different classes that it is sometime imposible to code without open
> manual). Of course this new library won't be compatible with wxWidgets but
> it will definitelly be better.
> And wxWidgets still will be available in current version - maybe even
> someone will still develop it.
>
Why would it be better? The current version already works; throwing in
templates and exceptions for the sake of throwing them in would just
introduce a whole new bunch of bugs into a mature system.
If you really feel the need to use "modern features", knock yourself out in
your own code. I do use templates sometimes, but in my experience they do
NOT always deliver the advantages they claim, because the code is so much
harder to read and understand, as well as impossible to debug. It's not
worth it to save a few lines, if it takes twice as much time and looks worse
than assembler.
cbull
"Paul" <remove_this_...@patchdance.com> wrote in message
news:sGxWf.753$i41...@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>
> If you really feel the need to use "modern features", knock yourself out
in
> your own code. I do use templates sometimes, but in my experience they do
> NOT always deliver the advantages they claim, because the code is so much
> harder to read and understand, as well as impossible to debug. It's not
> worth it to save a few lines, if it takes twice as much time and looks
worse
> than assembler.
>
Then take a look at wx sources. At all those fancy magic macros. Yeah, they
are really better than those nasty templates.
And I'm not saying about forcing language features to this library. I'm
saying about using modern design. And wxWidgets although working and being a
very useful library is still a poorly designed one.
Tomasz