>Greg or John, can you re-post the entire original message? Here's the original thread:
On Wednesday, March 18, 2009, at 08:53AM, "John Pritchard" <[email protected]> wrote: >There's plenty of cool inner classes, but there are too many inner classes. >And the ApplicationContext$DisplayHost (family) are first class examples of >the kind that really should not be inner classes. They're too heavy .. > >Dropping the heavier inner classes would be a cheap and easy way to cut the >pivot learning curve by ten or twenty percent.. > >ps ((the graphics code pointed my simple nose toward 'wtk/skin'.. >but of course i can see that moving DisplayHost to "wtk/skin" would not be >good >maybe "wtk/context" or "wtk/window")) > > >On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> DisplayHost is not really part of the skin. It is our "window" (again, no >> pun) into the native UI. Skins are a different concept. >> >> BTW, I don't agree with the "< 10 line" principle - we have lots of inner >> classes that are longer than 10 lines. To me, inner classes are simply a way >> to partition your namespace, just like packages. >> >> On Wednesday, March 18, 2009, at 08:02AM, "John Pritchard" < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> ><sanity-warning> >> > >> >the "ApplicationContext$DisplayHost" (and peers, no pun intended) >> definitely needs to move to "wtk/skin" >> > >> >(Related truism: any inner class more than ten lines [in Pivot's case] >> needs to export) >> > >> >sometimes your conscience only looks like another person >> >call it karma >> > >> >or.. file under.. "things to do before it's too late" >> > >> ></sanity-warning> >> > >> >
