Re: [jdt-ui-dev] RE: [Ejbbuilder-developers] Re: [eclipse-dev] TypePage

[Joseph Fifield <jfifield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2002-03-04 at 09:47, Martin_Aeschlimann@xxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> Hi Mariano,
> note that it's the superclass of TypePage that picks & chooses which UI
> components are visible. So If the modifier section does not make sense in
> your wizard, don't call createModifierControls from createContents. The
> TypePage still contains the model of it, so you can set the modifiers to
> 'public', and this value will be used when creating code.

I currently have this implemented, although I seem to be having some
trouble with the internal layout classes used (MGridLayout?), or
something. After adding some of my own controls, I get an exception when
calling the createSeparator function. Not sure why yet, I haven't looked
into it much.

> If you want to create more than one type (and a one type page wizard still
> makes sense), can't you just extend the 'createType' method and create the
> other files in your code? Similar thing have been done in the JUnit test
> case wizard.

This seems a little awkward to me. It doesn't really seem like it's the
wizard page's reponsibility to create the type. Currently we have a
seperate Builder class that is responsible for creating the types, and a
seperate Model, which is passed to the Builder. It seems the current
implementation of TypePage includes everything - the wizard page, the
model, and the builder. I know it would be quite a change from the
current implementation, but I think it would be nicer to pull the pieces
part, which seems like it would lend itself to greater reusability.

Likewise, it would be nice if there were exposed (public) APIs for
creating types that followed the user's preferences (formatting,
comments, etc). Maybe there isn't and I haven't found it yet...?

...rambling on...just tell me when to stop...

I would also love to see things like the "select source folder", "select
package", and "select class" dialogs exposed for reuse (they seem to be
internal now). Are currently any plans for this?

Thanks!

Joe