Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!alphalpha.com!nazgul
From: nazgul@alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x.motif
Subject: Re: Motif 1.1 question -- what is xmExtObjectClass <Xm/ExtObject.h>
Message-ID: <901124112849.843@alphalpha>
Date: 24 Nov 90 15:28:49 GMT
References: <110630028@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 16

> These internal objects were added to support gadget caching and "instance"
> data that couldn't be added to the instance record due to binary compatability
> requirements (mostly with VendorShell vs. Xt Shell subclasses). They were
> also used to thread together shells in terms of the desktop and the style guide.
> The latter requires that modality be enforced based on hierarchy. The desktop
> parent is used for this threading up to the level of screen and display.

Maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't it have been easier to just subclass
the Xt widgets and put the info in the subclass?  Then hang all the Motif widgets
off of the subclass?  Now you've got these hidden widgets, you have to
worry about when they get deleted (something which is done totally wrong
at 1.1 with the result that these psuedo widgets are referenced after being
freed).  You've got widgets with multiple children when the programmer only
expects one.  It's really pretty messy, and supporting it has to be a pain.

					-kee