Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!fernwood!apple!usc!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!ncar!ico!auto-trol!marbru
From: marbru@auto-trol.UUCP (Martin Brunecky)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: cleaning up from exit
Message-ID: <774@auto-trol.UUCP>
Date: 13 Mar 90 18:36:43 GMT
References: <9003022256.AA07109@moniz.bcm.tmc.edu> <9003052005.AA24152@expo.lcs.mit.edu> <132650@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <2999@bacchus.dec.com>
Reply-To: marbru@auto-trol.COM (Martin Brunecky)
Organization: Auto-trol Technology, Denver
Lines: 22

In article <2999@bacchus.dec.com> asente@decwrl.dec.com (Paul Asente) writes:
> ...(text deleted) .....  There are
>plenty of cases in widget sets where a widget adds an event handler to its
>parent, or to its children, or to some seemingly unrelated widget.
>
     I am not quite sure, but is THIS a good practice ? XUI and Motif
     are full of instances where one widget munges another one, assuming 
     intimate knowledge of it's internals, rather than documented
     widget methods. This, however, makes any extension to such widget
     set extremely difficult. 
     Yes, it is more difficult to accomplish the required overall toolkit
     functionality without hacks, but I believe that our widget sets
     (be it XUI or Motif) must evolve - and any assumptions one widget
     makes about other widgets today may (and will) prevent any improvements
     tomorrow. 


-- 
=*= Opinions presented here are solely of my own and not those of Auto-trol =*=
Martin Brunecky                   marbru@auto-trol.COM
(303) 252-2499                    {...}ncar!ico!auto-trol!marbru
Auto-trol Technology Corp. 12500 North Washington St., Denver, CO 80241-2404