🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 29 Sep 98 21:22:07 GMT, Phil Hunt <philh@vision25.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <6uocva$qje@ics.com> dbl@jackal.ics.com "David B. Lewis" writes:
>> |> I think that two approaches could be done here:
>> 
>> In short, the least-common-denominator approach or the union-of-the-sets
>> approach.
>> 
>> The first is not adequate, the second indeed is "a lot of work".
>> 
>> Consider what a builder tool really is supposed to do for you.
>> Is it a way to maintain code?
>
>Not sure what you mean. It's a way to produce code that is manitainable.
>
>> a way to produce lots of code quickly?
>
>It's a way to build user interfaces quickly.
>
>> a way to have a cross-platform solution?
>
>No.

There are two main approaches to user-interface builders that are
relevant here:

a) Template generator.

You drag'n'drop things into place to "prototype" a widget (or menu or
screen or whatever). 

Click "compile," and code is generated for you to then use. 

If, horror of horrors, you have to customize the results, you can't push
it back into the template generator; it's a one-way pipeline. 

b) GUI maintainer. 

This is the rather more complex approach.  This sort of system can
handle "both directions." You slap components together to build GUI
elements.  And the system generates code.   You then tune the code,
running, testing, adding event handlers.

And then you want to further modify the model.  *You push the code back
into the GUI tool,* and it maps your changes in.

In effect, this provides a sort of "reverse-engineering" tool; you can
push GUI code into the tool, and it can pop out with a nice D'n'D view
of the GUI model that results.   

These sorts of tools are really tough to build, and are often *VERY*
expensive.  The "definitive" X/Motif tool is such a tool, and costs on
the order of $10K per seat.  (That means that if there are 100
developers, you get to spend a million dollars on this...)

-- 
"Your job is being a professor and researcher: That's one hell of a good
excuse for some of the brain-damages of minix."  -- Linus Torvalds to
Andrew Tanenbaum
cbbrowne@ntlug.org- <http//www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>