[Gambas-user] Documentation glitch with Iconview ?

[Fabien Bodard]

Le Tuesday 08 January 2008 21:12:56 Benoit Minisini, vous avez écrit :
> On mardi 8 janvier 2008, Fabien Bodard wrote:
> > 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.
> >
> > ....
>
> I don't want namespaces. I can't stand them. Do real languages have
> namespaces? Not really.
>
> If two components export classes having the same name, there is no conflict
> in Gambas, there is inheritance. If they have the same name, they should
> mean the same thing.

:/
not sure in the case of users components... how to be sure that users not use 
a component with another ... that have not reason to be .... i'm not affraid 
for the first level developper but for the second level one...