Re: [Tile-dev] a tale of 2 trees

[Jeff H. <je...@ac...>]

Csaba Nemethi wrote:
> Jeff Hobbs schrieb:
> > Your points are in general correct, but overlook the direct remarks I
> > made below.  Those features are certainly required for a decent dir 
> > browser, but they are necessary for many other type of apps as well. 
> > The lack of these in treeview is why people have turned to pure Tcl 
> > alternatives even when treeview was available.  If you want to look at 
> > treeview as a multicolumn listbox, then it really fails in 2 areas - no 
> > x scrolling and the inability to control stretch/shrink of columns.  Joe 
> > has said he likely won't have the time to address these before 8.5.0, 
> > and thus I don't think it serves the core much to distract with the 
> > treeview.

> While I generally agree with your criticism concerning the current 
> development state of the treeview widget, I would have a quite serious 
> problem if treeview wouldn't be integrated into the core.  The reason is 
> that in the tile-enabled version of Tablelist I make use of some 
> treeview-related elements, like Treeheading.border and Treeheading.cell.

While this is an interesting aspect, it is not strictly in favor of the
treeview.  It is perhaps possible to have the elements without the widget.

> Also, your intention (decision?) to exclude treeview from the core 
> doesn't take into account that there are quite a few people who already 
> use treeview (in spite of its relatively early development state). 
> After all, this wouldn't be the first widget in the core whose early 
> versions are not yet quite satisfactory.

Please identify these people.  That is what I had hoped this discussion would
do - flush out users of treeview to advocate that they are perfectly happy
using it for X, Y and Z.  On the contrary, I have received only more
*negative* indicators.  I am still open either way, but I have been pushed
farther against in the last few days without anybody really advocating for on
core widget value.

Jeff