Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Discussions > dev > Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems

gef
Discussion topic

Back to topic list

Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems

Reply

Author anoncvs
Full name anonymous CVS access
Date 2004-01-30 10:02:11 PST
Message On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 09:23, bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com wrote:
> >>e.g. FigNode has a makePresentation() method
>
> Oops, I meant to point out that a NetNode has a makePresentation method. I don't think the model should know how it's presented.


IIRC, that was an attempt at making it optional for a developer using
GEF to understand the concept of a Renderer.

I think it is good to make some key concepts optional so that new
developers can get started more easily and so that simple cases can be
handled simply (e.g., an application object that is only rendered by one
corresponding Fig object). However, when it is not documented well, it
looks like bad design.

I wish there was an easy way for developers to express pairs of
corresponding classes without having to write a bunch of code to
explicitly manage the correspondence, unless they have a special
correspondence rule. E.g., if I had application objects Student,
Instructor, and Course, I might want them rendered by FigStudent,
FigInstructor, and FigCourse. But. maybe there is one special case,
applicaton object Room should be rendered by FigBuilding.

One thing has been added to the Java culture since I started GEF is the
wide spread usage of JUnit. JUnit encourages the use of a simple naming
convention for corresponding classes. E.g., Student and StudentTest.
But, it also allows a developer to build their own TestSuite if desired.

Maybe we could go with a naming convention as a way to make Renderers
optional. E.g., when adding an instance of model class C, the default
renderer would look for FigC. But, what package should it look in?
Of course, developers could always add their own Renderer to handle
special cases.

jason!



--------------------​--------------------​--------------------​---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe at gef dot tigris dot org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help at gef dot tigris dot org

« Previous message in topic | 5 of 10 | Next message in topic »

Messages

Show all messages in topic

[gef-dev] Scaling problems Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> 2004-01-29 18:06:21 PST
     RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems "Christensen, Blake" <Blake dot Christensen at dsionline dot com> "Christensen, Blake" <Blake dot Christensen at dsionline dot com> 2004-01-30 09:01:41 PST
         Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com 2004-01-30 09:19:48 PST
             Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com 2004-01-30 09:23:18 PST
                 Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems anoncvs anonymous CVS access 2004-01-30 10:02:11 PST
                     [gef-dev] UI/Model split (was Scaling problems) Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> 2004-01-30 11:31:17 PST
                         RE: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems "Christensen, Blake" <Blake dot Christensen at dsionline dot com> "Christensen, Blake" <Blake dot Christensen at dsionline dot com> 2004-01-30 11:46:28 PST
                             Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> 2004-01-30 11:47:42 PST
                                 Re: RE: [gef-dev] Scaling problems Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> Bob Tarling <bob dot tarling at ntlworld dot com> 2004-01-30 12:09:41 PST
                         Re: [gef-dev] UI/Model split (was Scaling problems) anoncvs anonymous CVS access 2004-01-30 12:22:52 PST
Messages per page: