Also when I said, "Window for GtkWindow", I meant "GtkWindow" would change to just a "Window" not as-is. Anyway saying Window for Gtk sounds much better :D.
Archit "John (J5) Palmieri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 12:49, Paolo Borelli wrote: > <snip> > > > > I also don't like the idea of stripping of the Gtk* namespace, since you > > could have a loadable library that offers its FooHBox or whatever. > > IMHO glade is the _GTK_ gui builder, so calling the Gtk widgets with > > their name (GtkHBox etc) is just fine. > > Well I didn't say stripping it. I was more of the opinion of seperating > it. So you have a dropdown list of packages to choose from and then a > lookahead textbox that can predict what class you want from that > package. Archit's example on the tooltips "Window for GtkWindow" would > just as simply be written "Window for Gtk". Less verbose and keeps the > meaning. > > We all might be programmers but if we want to make this easy for newbies > flooding them with GtkWindow when they might be writting Gtk.Window > might be confusing. If you split them from the begining they get used > to the fact that Gtk is actualy seperate from Window. Gtk is a > windowing toolkit package and Window is a class of that package. > > -- > J5 > > > ciao > > paolo > > _______________________________________________ Glade-devel maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/glade-devel
