Ed Leafe wrote: > On Aug 22, 2008, at 12:24 AM, Paul McNett wrote: > >> I could see dropping "Box" from all of these: >> >> mac:~/dabo/dabo/ui/uiwx pmcnett$ ls -1 *Box*.py >> dBox.py >> dCheckBox.py >> dComboBox.py >> dDateTextBox.py >> dEditBox.py >> dHtmlBox.py >> dListBox.py >> dMaskedTextBox.py >> dMessageBox.py >> dSearchBox.py >> dTextBox.py >> dTextBoxMixin.py > > Not all! dBox is, well, a *box*, after all.
Yeah, I obviously didn't review that list before I sent the message. Pie on my face! > Perhaps dTextBoxMixin -> > dTextMixin, but we don't develop apps using that class. The others are > questionable. Most languages call the info dialog a 'messagebox', and > are split between 'textbox' and 'textfield'. I've seen the edit box > control called 'textarea', as in HTML, but usually either an edit box > or a multi-line text box. Probably not worth changing, although I do like the ring of 'dText', 'dList', and 'dSearch'. > Not that I want to spend time on any of this, but I would rather > eliminate a ton of our d* classes that are not what we would 'expose' > as the Dabo Base Classes to a developer coming to the framework. If > they would never use it directly in an app, or subclass it, then it > shouldn't be d*. Like dDataControlMixin, dPemMixin, etc. Yeah, that's bothered me too. The 'd' communicates that this class is meant to be used by the appdev. There may be cases where people want to build custom classes on top of PemMixin, but that doesn't warrant giving PemMixin a 'd' up front. Anyone here want the straightforward-but-possibly-tedious task of making these changes? You'd get your name in lights in the release notes! Luckily these sorts of changes shouldn't require any changes of client code. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-dev This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
