Re: GUI doesn't appear when using ./run-octave

[Daniel J Sebald]

On 09/27/2012 01:35 AM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> On 09/26/2012 10:31 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> > On 26-Sep-2012, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> >
> > | On 09/24/2012 05:16 AM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> > |
> > |> I couldn't quite finish a patch that fixes a half dozen GUI bugs.
> > |> Hopefully within a day or so.
> > |
> > | I still need to make a couple small changes...close.
> >
> > Do you mean that you are working on a single jumbo patch that solves a
> > half dozen unrelated bugs? If so, then please split the patch into
> > multiple patches with each one fixing a single problem.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > jwe
>
> It would be nice to do individual bug fixes, but what I'm doing is
> shuffling things around in a more slot/signal fashion. The goal is to
> make solving all these bugs much easier because everything then falls
> under the one paradigm. So, it's not like the bugs in the current code
> can be solved with simple conditional statements or something equally
> easy. Instead there are problematic things like static variable
> "alreadyAsking" (which don't work under a multi-object paradigm, e.g.,
> can't recognize multiple file changes on disk).
>
> With the changes, I'm expecting it to become easier to develop fixes and
> solve bugs by making proper connections of signals and slots.

I've put a patch on Savannah:

patch #7857: Replace dynamic casts of GUI/IDE editor with more 
slots/signals configuration
https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?7857

that revamps the file editor portion of the GUI/IDE.  I think this is a 
patch where it might be easier to absorb after applying the patch and 
looking through the files file-editor.cc, file-editor-tab.cc, 
file-editor.h, file-editor-tab.h.  These files really aren't too big. 
The patch file seems too disjointed for perusing.

I've paused with development when I could have moved forward touching 
things up a bit.  However, I think it was Michael who pointed out there 
really isn't a specification for how the behavior should be, so maybe 
it's good to allow some time for folks to absorb the more signal/slot 
oriented style.  Then we can talk about ways to move forward and improve 
the code.

For example, there needs to be a way for the Exit/window-close signal to 
reach the file editor.

Keep in mind that I've aimed to make things as NonModal as possible so 
that the application is not "frozen" waiting on user input.  Such a 
thing is a big problem in an IDE where there are possible events from 
the outside (e.g., multiple file changes on disk) and from Octave (e.g., 
a processing script that might be displaying info or plotting as it 
proceeds).  We can pull back on that some, simply by changing a setting 
in the message box or file dialog from NonModal to ApplicationModal. 
But again, conversation about desired and logical behavior would be 
good.  (For example, I'm pretty sure everyone would prefer a NonModal 
find dialog.)

Dan