[interfacekit] Re: Widgets and the appkit

In short, no.

At length, the app_server's responsibility is to provide services; in 
this case, the service it provides is an API for drawing arbitrary 
raster and bitmap graphics.  I can assure you that Be's implementation 
did *not* have the widget drawing code in app_server.  As far as OBOS is 
concerned, there will be widget-specific drawing code in app_server over 
my dead body.  

Having made that rather dramatic statement, ;P I'm not really following 
you on this notion that widget-rendering code would be "conserved".  
What, precisely, is being conserved and how so?  Only a button draws 
itself like a button -- a different kind of widget drawing itself as a 
button would be misleading, at best.  If it looks like a button, it 
ought to *be* a button.  Now, if a developer wants a different sort of 
button that still draws like a button, then s/he simply derives from 
BButton and doesn't overload Draw().  Perhaps this idea of widget 
drawing in app_server has something to do with themes?  If so, we're all 
clever enough to figure something out that doesn't pollute app_server.

Anyway, if I'm missing the point, please enlighten me. =)

e

>Looking through the Button.cpp example, I have a question:
>
>Shouldn't drawing widgets be the responsibility of Picasso (I think 
that
>we should change the artist's name -- Monet, or
>Seurat.............. or something)?  The BButton class would notify
>[insert artist here] that this particular view is a common widget, and
>take off from there.  That way, widget-rendering code is conserved.  
It's
>not like it needs to be multithreaded anyway.
>
>Isaac

Our chief want is someone who will inspire us to be what we know we 
could be.
        - Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher (1803-1882)

Other related posts: