On 12/18/06, johnf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 18 December 2006 11:16, Paul McNett wrote:
> > johnf wrote:
> > > Sorry Nate I disagree with respect of extending AppWizard.  I would like
> > > to see the AppWizard dropped.  Let me say I use AppWizard everytime I
> > > want to test the data interfaces but that's all.
> >

I by no means said extend the App Wizard.  I was referring to a
tutorial about taking an App that starts in App Wizard and then
delving into the code to change the standard interface to reflect the
individuals needs.  It was suggested as a resource for
programming/dabo newbies who gained experience and want to take and
customize programs that they may have used the App Wizard to create
back when they didn't know anything else.

I have tested out the App Wizard a grand total of 3 times so far.  I
don't use it for production projects.  It is nice for some things but
I have to side with Ed on the point of it being misused and
misrepresented as the do-everything-for-you,
this-is-the-only-thing-that-dabo-is application by people that don't
have enough programming experience to know any better.

> > I believe Nate was suggesting documenting AppWizard, for the purpose of
> > telling of its strengths and weaknesses. To summarize the various
> > viewpoints as I see them (people can correct me if I have it wrong):
> >
> > Paul: Keep AppWizard as-is, get it documented
> > Ed: Eventually extend AppWizard to cdxml; get it documented
> > Nate: Get it documented
> > John: Drop AppWizard
> > Carl: Make it into something better, faster, stronger. Extend!
> >
> > I don't understand wanting to drop something that *at least* lets you
> > test data interfaces, and *at most* gives you a skeleton for a
> > highly-scalable application. I do understand the benefits of getting it
> > documented, so it can be seen in its proper context vis-a-vis Dabo itself.
> I do in fact use the AppWizard for testing.  I just think it is not the best
> thing to provide a Dabo newbie.  I'm with Ed in his assessment as to the
> mis-use of AppWizard.  If you want to document it great but I'm sure Ed is
> right.  AppWizard will be mis-used.

I think documentation is absolutely critical on this.  Since I agree
on the mis-use of the App Wizard, the whole reason for the
documentation suggestion on how to extend and customize an application
generated by the App wizard came from the notion that if newbies first
use it to create apps then this can slowly ween them off of it and
regulate to a unit testing role.

>
> Creating builders might be a better way to go.  Where small builders help
> create a data connection (CxnEditor.py),  BizObjEditor.py, ClassDesigner.py.
> And then a builder to put them together.  Just a thought!

I would certainly like to see this one, maybe help work on it
eventually.....   I was going to wait to throw this out until after
the graph widgets, but might as well do it now.  Small builders like
the data connection and biz object builders can be implemented as a
plugin or a snippet system.  My next job after the graph widgets was
going to be to implement a snippet system for the Editor in the IDE
that functioned just like TextMate's snippet system.  I really want to
see something like this get implemented, though it might be a fairly
major revision.  We could even include standard snippets like creating
a main application form, creating a data connection, new property, etc
right out of the box...

Small builders could go into this category or as a "plugin" if such a
system is desired.  I personally think a plugin system could do us
well.  It's extremely easy to implement in Python too.....

Just food for thought on the upcoming roadmap in case someone gets
ambitious and wants to develop this before I get around to it probably
in mid-January.

> --
> John Fabiani
>
> _______________________________________________
> Post Messages to: [email protected]
> Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev
>

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev

Reply via email to