New releases of KDE and Povray and a proposal

[Luis Passos Carvalho]

On Wednesday 04 February 2004 21:31, Andreas Zehender wrote:
>
> Ah, I remember.
> The part creates the widget if not created by PMShell. That's used to
> preview a kpm scene embedded in konqueror. The part works correct without a
> view widget.
>

Yes I know. Or at least it should. But in stripping the creation of the 
widget, I might have stripped something else.

>
> Do you only need object serialization/deserialization and creation for the
> object library? That means the m_pPrototypeManager, m_pInsertRuleSystem and
> m_pIOManager.
>

For the object tree preview and drag'n'drop I need:
	a scene: m_pPart->m_pScene
	insertion rules (for drop): m_pPart->m_pInsertRuleSystem
	serialization (for drag): indirectly from any PMObject I need 
m_pPart->m_pPrototypeManager

As for m_pIOManager, I  may need it as well, but I'm not sure. Is the code for 
xml serialization handled by the IO Manager or is it stored in PMObject and 
its descendents? I don't remember.

These needs aren't direct requirements of the code in the object library, but 
rather indirect through the components I used to build the library browser. 
PMTreeView and the parts' object insertion code.

> One more idea: What about collecting the gui functionality of the part in a
> separate class. The part should work correctly without an instance of this
> class. Then dependent of the created components of the part, gui
> functionality is available or not. Could be extended to other functionality
> groups to make PMPart more scalable and flexible.

That's pretty much what I said only you're saying it from top down and I said 
it bottom up. :)

In my case I said to create a PMPartBase containing everything but visual 
element and putting the visual elements in PMPart that inherits from 
PMPartBase. Obviously, we would go through every object replacing references 
to PMPart with references to PMPartBase.

What you're saying is have a PMPart with everything but the visual elements, 
and then creating a PMPartUI or something like that that contains those 
visual elements and inherit from PMPart.

Both are really the same, only the class names change. Your idea makes us 
change less code as we don't have to visit the objects code to change the 
references to PMPart to references to another class. That's fine by me.

Best regards,
Luis