Re: [Perl-widget-developer] VOTE: display() name

[Issac G. <ne...@wr...>]

> ISSUE #1:
>
>
>    1. display()
>    2. render()
>    3. show()
>    4. draw()

1.  display()

> ISSUE #2 (related):
>
> On HTML widgets, I think there is still a place for an html()
> method.  This method has no parallels in the Gtk or Curses
> widgets.  However, the difference is that calling the html()
> method on an HTML widget simply requests the widget to report
> the HTML that would be used.  Calling the display() method
> (or render() or whatever) is a tacit promise that the HTML
> will be displayed.
>
> This information will be of use in handling the state management.
> Variables in the State which have not been "display()ed" can
> be maintained by creating <input type=hidden> elements.
>
> It is because of this difference between the html() method
> and the display() method that "display()" seems better to me
> than "render()".
>
Against. I still think a display "driver" should be loaded by the Controller
and used to display() any Widgets requested.  That seems to me the most
compatible with any type of Widget that we'll ever want to create, and
therefore means less overhead to expand the library later.

  Issac

Internet is a wonderful mechanism for making a fool of
yourself in front of a very large audience.
  --Anonymous

Moving the mouse won't get you into trouble...  Clicking it might.
  --Anonymous

PGP Key 0xE0FA561B - Fingerprint:
7E18 C018 D623 A57B 7F37 D902 8C84 7675 E0FA 561B