Hi, I am using 'Object Model' in this sense: The way object's data and functions are accessed which tghitly depends on how objects are designed, i.e. their architecture. By the latter I am NOT referring to object hierarchy.
Having used in the past for several years other object models in Delphi (TM) and Lazarus (free/open), is making me realise that the object model employed in Delphi and Lazarus are far more logical and productive. I have been struggling to embrace Gtk+ and Qt object models in vain due to their counter-intuitive object models. Instead of using real tangible objects as a model they adopted to use an unnatural broken model for their widget architecture. So, to start my car, I need to create a starter object, plug it in into my car's engine, initialise its circuitry, and finally, if my car should start! This is also like having a detacheable digestive system, which one would plug in when one needs to digest food! Why not integrate all objects required by a widget in the first place? I can see an answer to this: to save memory space and processing resources so object can be trimmed to what is necessary. That is a good reason, but shouldn't a good widget designer create not-often-used objects when an attempt to use them is made. You may say that causes an access violation/segmentation fault. However, that can be avoided easily. Why shouldn't a Gtk+ coder be able to use something like this: gtkobjectinstance->helper-object->method() And gtkobjectinstance->helper-object->property = newpropertyvalue; ? I am perplexed, but it seems logic is not uniform. Edward _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
