Home » Eclipse Projects » Eclipse Platform » -> How tied is the connection between IProgressMonitor and platform.core
|
Re: -> How tied is the connection between IProgressMonitor and platform.core [message #129917 is a reply to message #129902] |
Tue, 16 September 2003 05:06 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: ThisisFake.Fakeness.xyz
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 06:12:58 +0200, Martin Kersten wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I was talking with Simon (Arsenault) about the platform dependence of
> the IWizard
> implementations. He stated out that the IProgressMonitor implementations
> mainly
> depend/are part of the platform.core packages of eclipse. Therefore the
> 'normal'
> wizards also depend on the core packages.
>
> The question we couldn't answer this far:
>
> Q: Why is the IProgressMonitor depending that much on the platform rather
> then
> being part of JFace?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Martin (Kersten)
>
> PS: Orginal-thread 'SWT vs. JFace' can be found at the eclipse.platform.swt
> newsgroup.
I can see how the visual aspects of ProgressMonitor would be related
strongly to JFace, but aren't their other elements of this class that are
not related to JFace? I dont entirely know how the class works, but it
seems rather strange to be passing around a Graphic object into functions
that don't know about graphics. so I imagine the non-graphic aspects are
what depends on the core so much. so the graphic elements can come from a
UI package, but the updating functionality should be from the core I would
imagine.
thats my opinion, but I am new to eclipse.
CL
|
|
| |
Re: -> How tied is the connection between IProgressMonitor and platform.core [message #130362 is a reply to message #130051] |
Tue, 16 September 2003 18:24 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: richkulp.NO--SPAM.us.ibm.com
The main reason that I can think of for IProgressMonitor being in the
core is so that core functions can "use" a progressmonitor without
having to pre-req any visual plugins. This happens with many of the core
API, then can be passed in an IProgressMonitor. This way they can do
there stuff, update the monitor as required, all without forcing UI code
to be present.
Rich
|
|
|
Re: -> How tied is the connection between IProgressMonitor and platform.core [message #130455 is a reply to message #129902] |
Tue, 16 September 2003 20:53 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: John_Arthorne.oti.com_
The interface is defined in core (for the reason Rich states), but the
implementation is typically in the UI. If you're hacking JFace, it
should be easy to copy this interface (and perhaps a couple of other
small utilities) over without having to worry about further coupling
with core.
--
Martin Kersten wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I was talking with Simon (Arsenault) about the platform dependence of
> the IWizard
> implementations. He stated out that the IProgressMonitor implementations
> mainly
> depend/are part of the platform.core packages of eclipse. Therefore the
> 'normal'
> wizards also depend on the core packages.
>
> The question we couldn't answer this far:
>
> Q: Why is the IProgressMonitor depending that much on the platform rather
> then
> being part of JFace?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Martin (Kersten)
>
> PS: Orginal-thread 'SWT vs. JFace' can be found at the eclipse.platform.swt
> newsgroup.
>
>
|
|
| |
Re: -> How tied is the connection between IProgressMonitor and platform.core [message #132390 is a reply to message #131296] |
Thu, 18 September 2003 19:41 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: John_Arthorne.oti.com_
Core can't have any dependency on JFace. Core can be used stand-alone,
in an headless Ant script, as part of a Swing app, etc. There is no
relationship from core components to any UI component. There can't be
two copies of the same type because they would not be compatible at runtime.
--
Martin Kersten wrote:
> Also I would be glad to see IProgressMonitor becoming a part of
> the JFace API. I guess it is a helpfull and important capability of
> the current wizard implementation. It also wouldn't create any
> broken API I guess - Having two versions of IProgressMonitor.
> One being part of JFace and one 'dummy' being part of core
> and extending the jface version.
>
> Is there a reason, why the ProgressMonitor shouldn't become
> part of JFace? Simon stated that beside the ProgressMonitor
> dependency, the wizard is free of dependencies.
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Jan 10 22:29:56 GMT 2025
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04723 seconds
|