Hi, Great changes guys! "e4view". In case you missed it, I have blogged about this change [1]. Eric, can you share some of the implementation details with us? Do you create an invisible counterpart e3 view as a bridge?
What are the plans for the next step? Cheers, Wim [1] http://industrial-tsi-wim.blogspot.nl/2013/08/a-giant-leap-for-eclipse-rcp.html On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Jonas Helming <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > are there any plans to support the following use case: > I have an existing 3.x application running on compat layer. Now I want to > add a new view using fragments, meaning I plug a new e4 view into the model > which was created by the compat layer? > Currently this is not possible, because the model is not fully created > when fragments or processors are merged. > > Regards > Jonas > > Am 02.08.2013 16:19, schrieb Eric Moffatt: > > Wim, we've already started on at least part of if. I've just committed > changes to the org.eclipse.ui.views extension point that allows someone > using Eclipse 4 to declare a new view with its implementation being e4 > style (DI...). This is the first test case; if it seems to be the correct > direction we expect to do this for other extensions such as > org.eclipse.ui.menus (e4 Handlers...). > > We also have ongoing work in progress that will alter how we integrate > with the legacy 3.x API so that creation of any necessary 3.x artifacts > (Workbench[Window, Page], IWorkbenchParts, ViewReferences, PartSites...) > all get created 'automagically' during the rendering stage. Part of this > will be to add the new life cycle events to allow this to happen. Once done > your mixed model RCP app should be capable of consuming most (if not all) > existing views / editors, even those that need access to EditorReferences... > > In fact we've just been discussing how we might override the default > renderer factory so that we can supply ones specific to the IDE (so that > they can create the necessary 3.x artifacts without introducing > dependencies. > > Onwards, > Eric > > [image: Inactive hide details for Wim Jongman ---08/02/2013 08:28:12 > AM---Hi, When we spoke on the e4/RCP BoF it was made clear that al]Wim > Jongman ---08/02/2013 08:28:12 AM---Hi, When we spoke on the e4/RCP BoF it > was made clear that allowing the e4 > > > > From: > > > Wim Jongman <[email protected]> <[email protected]> > > To: > > > E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]><[email protected]>, > > > Date: > > > 08/02/2013 08:28 AM > > Subject: > > > [e4-dev] Focus for Luna > > Sent by: > > > [email protected] > > ------------------------------ > > > > Hi, > > When we spoke on the e4/RCP BoF it was made clear that allowing the e4 > programming model on e3 was the first priority for Luna (or maybe that was > what I wanted to hear?). > > On the plan [1] the first item on the list is the effort to use e4 in the > e3 context. However, when I go to the milestone breakdown [2] all of these > items are still on the unscheduled list. > > Is there already an idea what the current focus is for Luna? > > Thanks and best regards, > > Wim > _______________________________________________ > e4-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > e4-dev mailing > [email protected]https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > e4-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev > >
<<image/gif>>
<<image/gif>>
_______________________________________________ e4-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
