Re: GtkAda Package Hierarchy (was ...vs Windex, Gwindows)

["Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca>]

Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes:
> 
>>While some of this is unavoidable as the project matures (like some
>>of the support moving to this Pango package), I found it rather
>>confusing. What is really needed is a comprehensive user guide, with
>>full blown examples (not the few that come with the sources).
>>
>>One area that I found weak in the extreme was how to use GtkAda to
>>draw on some sort of a graphics area. Many questions came to mind
>>about that (and I have done X Window graphics), but I had to do a
>>lot of experimentation and spec grepping to get through that.
> 
> Do you count testgtk in the "few examples"?  If memory serves, it does
> have graphics examples using GtkCanvas and XPMs.

I don't recall now, because it was several weeks ago when I went
hunting. Part of the problem (and this is documentation related),
is what do you go grepping for? There are a number of example
programs there, but how do you look for "something that does drawing"
beyond the scribble program? You need to know what you're looking
for to begin with (documentation). I think I ended up looking at
GDK and GLIB references, but beyond that I don't recall now.

Anyway, I don't know if I finally ended up there or not, but I
managed to figure it out with a lot of trial and error and
looking at specs.

Another problem that often occurs in example programs is they
tend to highlight some all-singing all dancing feature or
group thereof. Simpler examples would probably be more useful,
in some cases. I know... we can contribute them ;-)

PACKAGE HIERARCHY COMMENTS:

One thing about the package hierarchy of GtkAda that "bugs"
me, is that the packages seem to subdivided on C terms.
For example why do we have a Gtk and GtkAda package? Why
are not all widgets and packages under a root GtkAda package?

I think the intention of GtkAda was to be a thick binding, so
why not make GtkAda the top level package and subdivide things
on a thick basis underneath? With the Glib, Gdk, Gtk,
GtkAda, Pango top level packages, it just seems a little bit
uncoordinated. It pollutes top level name space too. I always
ask myself, where is x in the GtkAda namespace? Some font
thingies are here, but others are in Pango, and yet others
are..

They would make more sense to me as a hierarchy
underneath GtkAda, and subdivided by functional category
perhaps. As a perfectionist, I guess I yearn for
greater namespace purity :)

The Gtk.Extra is another example. The fact that these are
"extra" widgets, doesn't necessarily imply that they cannot
be in a GtkAda.X hiearchy with other "normal" widgets. Why
should "extra" widgets be treated differently than others?
It just seems to be too much influenced by the fact that
they are in a gtkextra subdirectory, which is unimportant
to the end developer. If you care about traceability to
code, then comments in the specs do that job nicely.

Again folks, I am not trying to be critical here of the fine
effort that folks have done with GtkAda. I applaud their
efforts and as users of GtkAda the rest of us enjoy using
the fruits of their labour. It is always easier to be critical
than to contribute. Please just accept this as my humble
$0.02 worth of opinion. I just hope this post doesn't stir
up a hornet's nest, because that is not the intent. ;-)
-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg