Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!sgi!shinobu!fido.wpd.sgi.com!marktwain.rad.sgi.com!linton
From: linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.interviews
Subject: Re: Interviews documentation
Keywords: Examples
Message-ID: <1991Jun4.161145.6216@fido.wpd.sgi.com>
Date: 4 Jun 91 16:11:45 GMT
References: <9106040032.AA23987@hadar.fai.com> <1991Jun04.041701.21620@convex.com>
Sender: news@fido.wpd.sgi.com (Usenet News Admin)
Reply-To: linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton)
Organization: sgi
Lines: 23

In article <1991Jun04.041701.21620@convex.com>, connolly@convex.convex.COM (Dan Connolly) writes:
|> For every class, or every closely related group of classes, I'd like to see
|> a one- or two-page example demonstrating its use. This would help clear up
|> my confusion over what classes implement the 2.6 (interactors) style and
|> which ones do the 3.0 (glyphs) style and which ones do both.
|> Plus, to see if example code is up to date, all I've got to do is compile
|> it and see if it works. I can trust it much easier than a man page.
|> 
|> 
|> I'd REALLY like to see more work on iclass:
|> * if I'm browsing something like:
|> class A{
|>   public:
|> 	bcd(int x, int y);
|> }
|> 	I'd like to be able to click on bcd() and see:
|> 	* the code that implements it (the REAL doc :)
|> 	* the man page that explains it.

I agree completely.  Alas, there are many more things that would be good to have
than we have time to work on.  Current higher priorities include more glyph-based
UI components (especially text/document-oriented), converting ibuild to work
with glyph-based components, and completing the reference manual.