Yes but that complicates things a lot.
The reason I'm thinking about integrating this into XML is that it's already
easy to parse.
2010/7/2 OvermindDL1 <[email protected]>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:28 AM, omer katz <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2010/6/29 Koen Deforche <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> Hey Omer,
> >>
> >> 2010/6/2 omer katz <[email protected]>:
> >> >
> >> > Hello,
> >> > I had been thinking about a way to automate even more the process of
> >> > creating user interfaces in Wt.
> >> > If we could define widgets on the XML file like this for example:
> >> >>
> >> >> <Widget type="WTextEdit" name="foo" value="bar" />
> >> >
> >> > It would make development of user interfaces much easier and even
> >> > cheaper as
> >> > regular web developers could just do it themselves.
> >> > It will also allow us to create the Wt Creator much more easily.
> >>
> >> Aside from conerns with syntax, I cannot but agree with the idea. This
> >> syntax is in fact the initial syntax I used for WTemplate, but mixing
> >> XHTML tags with new invented tags makes it hard to easily spot the
> >> variables in a template -- and this is why I changed from <WWidget ...
> >> > to ${ } syntax.
> >>
> >> Still, the XML approach may be more appropriate in this case,
> >> especially if you consider that a widget may contain other widgets.
> >
> >
> > I suppose that RapidXML supports querying for a certain XML tag.
> > So it's not trouble there.
> > You just GetElementByTagName("Widget") and read the attributes for each
> one.
> > I am suggesting a compile time tool since I wouldn't like the user to
> > specify the needed type within the code itself as well.
> > I was a Loki developer. Of course I know traits.
> > The problem is that if we are parsing the type and are creating a new
> one,
> > the type will have to be deducted on runtime.
> > I thought about refactoring WidgetMap to contain empty widgets which will
> be
> > cloned but adding each existing widget is a nightmare.
> > Unfortunately C++ lacks reflection so we're stuck here with either a
> compile
> > time tool or some factory that can map strings to objects.
>
> Could always create/add a scheme/lisp/etc... interpreter (Boost.Spirit
> created one as a new example recently, not done yet though), that
> would let you create the definition files like this, and they could be
> properly mapped, executed, and so forth:
> (Widget :type "Slider" :name "foo" :value "bar"
> (Event :name "ValueChanged" :language "JavaScript"
> function handler(value) { alert (value); }
> )
> )
> And since it is a full interpreter, it could run code as well (the
> above may look like a definition file, but it is actually code, and as
> such can still run arbitrary code).
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
> What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
> Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
> _______________________________________________
> witty-interest mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
witty-interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
