Re: [Tile-dev] modified themes for labelframes

[Damon C. <dam...@tc...>]

> Were you trying to write something that passed the Snit test suite,
> or just an analogous framework?  If the former, is not 100% because
> of lack of time, or were there specific things you found you couldn't
> duplicate?  The subject of re-implementing Snit on top of XOTcl or
> something like it has indeed come up recently, and it's an interesting
> notion; I'm very curious to know what the gaps might be.


    To be honest, I started down the path of using SNIT-like syntax and
design along with some features I actually appreciated in BWidgets. 
Though I really hate BWidget's internals for designing widgets, there
were a few megawidget-specific things that it did that I liked.

    Specifically, the validation of widet options based on type was
something I found that SNIT didn't do.  At least not in the versions I
was using back when I started playing with this stuff.  I'll admit
that I haven't used SNIT in a while now because most of my work is
BWidget-related.

    The other thing that differs is the way options and methods are
defined.  This was mostly because the prior syntax in SNIT wasn't very
expandable, and I needed to add some options to it.  I know that you
were working on rewriting the syntax, but I haven't followed that
development.  We might be very close to each other now.

    Finally, I did not try AT ALL to duplicate much of SNIT's
functionality as an object system.  The framework that I wrote was
PURELY designed as a means for creating megawidgets using XOTcl.  I
felt that since it was already built on top of an object system, there
really wasn't much worth in me trying to duplicate SNIT completely.

    What I ultimately ended up with was what I wanted.  A megawidget
framework with SNIT-like syntax that is built on top of a C-based
object system.  I tested this by porting the BWidget ButtonBox over to
the new framework, and it works reasonably well.  I e-mailed you a
copy of what I had if you want to take a look at it.

    I'm willing to put in the effort to do a full conversion of BWidgets
to SNIT or any other OO system if one is included in the core of Tcl. 
Without that, I'm not interested.  I use BWidgets more than any other
library due to its pure-Tcl-ness (TM). 0-]

D


> Were you trying to write something that passed the Snit test suite,
> or just an analogous framework?  If the former, is not 100% because
> of lack of time, or were there specific things you found you couldn't
> duplicate?  The subject of re-implementing Snit on top of XOTcl or
> something like it has indeed come up recently, and it's an interesting
> notion; I'm very curious to know what the gaps might be.
>
> Will
>
> On Aug 12, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Jeff Hobbs wrote:
>
>> Damon Courtney wrote:
>>
>>>> Given the complexity of the rest ... I'm inclined to think that this
>>>> may well be more appropriate as a snidget (or xidget, should we do
>>>> xotcl widgets ;) ).  At some point, we have to draw the line for
>>>> where
>>>> we layer and where we hard-code.
>>>>
>>>
>>>     I had heard somewhere that 8.5 would include XOTcl as the
>>> object system with wrappers for Itcl and Snit?  Is that true?
>>>  I piddled around with a library a while back that was
>>> basically SNIT written in XOTcl.  I called it XWidgets. 0-]
>>> It wasn't 100% there, but pretty damn close. If anyone's
>>> interested, I can send it along somewhere.