[Gambas-user] Documentation glitch with Iconview ?

[Fabien Bodard]

Le Tuesday 08 January 2008 19:37:06 Benoit Minisini, vous avez écrit :
> On mardi 8 janvier 2008, manuel viet wrote:
> > Benoit Minisini wrote:
> > > On mardi 8 janvier 2008, manuel viet wrote:
> > >> Serious question now, is it possible to build custom
> > >> controls in gambas and integrate them in the IDE ?
> > >> Last I tried (1.9.47) it wasn't working yet.
> > >
> > > Not really, unless you put it in a component inside the gambas source
> > > tree.
> >
> > I understand you've already plenty to do with the code
> > cleanup and the 64 bits support, but I really think it
> > would be a major bonus if Gambas could load custom
> > controls in the IDE at runtime ; many time, you just
> > don't have the possibility to build a full application,
> > but you somehow have tiny ideas that are ideal to
> > improve or create a control. Or you don't finish a
> > project, but there are already classes that could just
> > be spin off.  If people could toy around and exchange
> > seamlessly those bits and pieces of code it could
> > create a great incentive toward gb.
> >
> > Look at other great Open Source projects : Linux,
> > TeX, Perl ; those are undoubtedly nerdy, but they
> > gained traction not only because they were good,
> > but also because users could make trials freely,
> > toy with bits and pieces, share results. There are
> > bundles of classes to try for perl, an infinite number
> > of stylesheets for LaTeX, and countless obscure
> > drivers for linux. None of these projects were any
> > better than say *BSD, groff or tcl at the beginning,
> > but they took the lead because the sharing between
> > users was easier.
> >
> > The way I see it, if there was a good exchange
> > structure of "unofficial" components in gambas it
> > might create a great movement of adoption by the
> > non-nerdy crowd ; maybe we could even see again
> > basic listings printed in the press ;-) to teach normal
> > users how to improve themselves some parts of the
> > components. Of course, there would be an enormous
> > amount of rubbishes, but nobody expects them to
> > get inside the official build. But maybe some would
> > be good enough to become official after a while ?
> >
> > -----
> > --
> > Manuel Viet
>
> I agree.
>
> Technically, you can already do 99% of a custom component. Are missing:
>
> * The possibility to automatically add icons in the IDE toolbar. At the
> moment the control icons are stored directly in the IDE source code.
>
> * The ability to create a binary package of the component.
>
maybe another thing is missing...

the ability to have a name space for the comonents...  if custom components 
are made it reduce the luck to have classes or function conflict...

And in the case where we want to 'surclass'<fr> a  class we have juste to give 
the same namespace.

....

> These are the only two technical reasons why a component must be included
> in the Gambas source code tree.
>
> Anyway, a custom component must be named differently from a official one.
>
> Official components are named "gb.xxx.yyy". Custom components could be
> named "gb.custom.xxx", or "custom.xxx" without the "gb." prefix, or
> something else. If you have ideas...