[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [platform-swt-dev] SWT-Design Decisions
|
Steve Northover schrieb:
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> These questions have been asked before.
>
> 1) Interfaces have various advantages and drawbacks. Defining them for
> the purposes of Javadoc is not in keeping with the small side of the
> toolkit. What's an "SWT-Binding writer"?
Say I sit down and write a binding for any GUI-Toolkit.
> 2) There could be abstact classes but that would introduce a layer,
> increase the size of the toolkit and make things slower, and possibly
> harder to debug and maintain.
Accepted.
> 3) The idea was to minimize the number of constants in the toolkit.
> Read the Javadoc for class SWT.
>
Well I know. What I asked for is if you think it was the right choice? I
often find myself using SWT-Constants although this isn't appropriate
e.g JFaceDialog.open() == SWT.OK (it works but it's not appropriate). If
every class would have provide it's own constants I would ever had the
idea to do so.
Tom
--
B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t EDV Systemhaus GmbH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
tom schindl leiter softwareentwicklung/CSE mobile ++43 676 3232147
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eduard-bodem-gasse 8/3 A-6020 innsbruck fax ++43 512 935833
http://www.bestsolution.at phone ++43 512 935834
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature