Not strictly speaking but maybe we need some extra attributes later on
there so I would model it explicitly.
Rethink my proposal would change to:
MWizard extend MElementContainer<MWizardPage> {
}
MWizardPage extends MPart {
}
For MDialog we could also think of
MDialog {
MPart part
}
which is probably better alignment with a MWizard then.
Tom
On 09.10.13 15:03, Wim Jongman wrote:
> I think a MWizard is an excellent idea but do we need MWizardPages?
> Having wizard pages is specific to an implementation of a wizard.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wim
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Tom Schindl <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> The concept is universal and has nothing to do with SWT / JFace.
>
> MDialog extends MPart {
>
> }
>
> MWizard extends MElementContainer<MWizardPage> {
>
> }
>
> MWizardPage {
>
> }
>
> MPart extends MWizardPage, .... {
>
> }
>
> Hack you could even see a wizard to be a specialication of
> MPartStackContainer!
>
> Tom
>
> On 09.10.13 14:40, Marc Teufel wrote:
> > Are you sure that this is really more consistent ? Dont forget:
> Wizards
> > for instance are a JFace-specific kind of thing and i always
> thought the
> > application model itself should be independent of SWT, JFace. Or
> do you
> > think of a more abstract way of integration and if yes how this could
> > look like?
> >
> >
> > 2013/10/9 Lars Vogel <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>>
> >
> > Having dialogs and wizards in the model would definitely be more
> > consistent IMHO.
> >
> > Am 09.10.2013 11:50 schrieb "Tom Schindl"
> > <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>>:
> >
> > On 07.10.13 16:50, Markus A. Kuppe wrote:
> > > On 10/07/2013 04:37 PM, Lars Vogel wrote:
> > >> I personally think the lack of Pojo programming support for
> > the Eclipse IDE
> > >> is preventing a larger ecosystem to provide Eclipse 4
> > extensions. So your
> > >> work started for POJO views in
> > >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=356511 was
> > really great.
> > >> Having the same of handlers would help. Maybe it could be
> > used to build a
> > >> perspective switcher which works in the IDE and the RCP
> > applications.
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > the same goes for PreferencePages. Ideally, the preference
> > page extesion
> > > point ("org.eclipse.ui.preferencePages") would accept POJOs
> > and not just
> > > instances implementing
> > org.eclipse.ui.IWorkbenchPreferencePage (similar
> > > to bug #356511).
> >
> > Before doing this I'd like us to discuss in more general
> if Dialog &
> > Wizards should not get part of the model!
> >
> > Tom
> > _______________________________________________
> > e4-dev mailing list
> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > e4-dev mailing list
> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> > Web: http://www.teufel.net
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > e4-dev mailing list
> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
