Troels Henriksen wrote:
Rainer Joswig joswig@lisp.de writes:
I think one also should look whether the implemented facilities are usable (look and feel also) and correctly drawn.
While look & feel is obviously important for a GUI programming toolkit, I think the focus for a 2.0 release should be on spec compliance, with look & feel being a secondary goal to be worked on once it's clear that a full spec implementation has been reached (or is close).
Are the implemented gadgets working?
How about menus, choices, accepting values dialogs, etc?
Is incremental updating working?
These are all instances of "do we implement the spec?" (The answer is no for some of those.) I've heard that incremental output, as described in the spec, is not feasible to implement, does anyone have knowledge about that? Otherwise, my experience is that it works pretty well.
Does accepting-values and input editing work now? The last time I checked, it didn't work for commands that took multiple arguments. If I remember correctly, when I changed only one value from the default, it looked like McCLIM would cycle through all of the other fields, and I could never get the process to terminate correctly. I encountered this building a GUI for a program that takes a very large number of keyword arguments to tailor its behavior. I will try to test this again, but fear that because of other commitments, won't be able to do it until after the end of January. Does anyone else have a McCLIM program with commands with several arguments?
I will try to see if I still have a copy of a program that used this --- I may have ripped it all out and done some messy kludge of n commands to replace it....