Author Topic: Rewritten wxSmith  (Read 9291 times)

Offline byo

  • Plugin developer
  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
Rewritten wxSmith
« on: March 23, 2006, 01:21:38 pm »
I've decided to add current source code of rewritten wxSmith into svn (it will be in wxSmith/new directory) :)

If someone want to look into new structure, I tried to document almost everytning in doxygen (doxyfile attached in sources).

But I must warn that this is still during development and older version must be used for designing wxWidgets forms. New version will simply not work. Some things still need to be coded and of course there are some really bad bugs  :?.
As soon as new version gets the functionality of old one, it will replace current wxSmith.

And one more thing for those who are waiting for some new features - after rewriting, wxSmith will look almost exactly as the old version. Only it's internal structure changes.
But I hope that new structure will make coding new features easier (and much more bug-free) :)

Offline mandrav

  • Project Leader
  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
    • Code::Blocks IDE
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2006, 01:39:32 pm »
Quote
I've decided to add current source code of rewritten wxSmith into svn (it will be in wxSmith/new directory)

Wise move ;)
Be patient!
This bug will be fixed soon...

Offline Game_Ender

  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 551
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2006, 06:06:34 pm »
Very Cool.  It would be slightly cleaner to create a new branch in the root "branches" directory and just merge that branch into the old version of wxSmith when you are finished.  After all if you are doing branch based development in subversion you might as well do it the subversion way.

Offline cyberkoa

  • Plugin developer
  • Almost regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 145
    • http://
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2006, 08:12:26 am »
byo, a reply to your mail . the in fact the wxsbitmapbutton.h is not missing , in contract , I add wxsbitmapbutton.cpp accidentally , I have not coded the bitmapbutton widget . Anyway , I shall add the wxsbitmapbutton.h later.

One thing that I notice in the wxSmith.cbp , both in "new" and HEAD version, miss out the host application setting ..  Any purpose of taking of the that ? I could only run the wxSmith project when the host application is set.


Offline PsYhLo

  • Almost regular
  • **
  • Posts: 157
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #4 on: April 06, 2006, 10:16:13 am »
i found this in src\plugins\contrib\wxSmith\new\defwidgets\wxsheaders.h
Code: C++
  1. void wxsFlexGridSizer::BuildSizerCreatingCode(wxString& Code,const wxString& WindowParent,wxsCodingLang Language)
  2. {
  3.     switch ( Language )
  4.     {
  5.         case wxsCPP:
  6.             Code << GetVarName() << _T(" = new wxFlexGridSizer(")
  7.                  << wxString::Format(_T("%d,%d,"),Cols,Rows) [b]<<[/b]
  8.                  << wxsDimensionProperty::GetPixelsCode(VGap,VGapDU,WindowParent,wxsCPP) << _T(",")
  9.                  << wxsDimensionProperty::GetPixelsCode(HGap,HGapDU,WindowParent,wxsCPP) << _T(");\n");
  10.  

the << must not be there
« Last Edit: April 06, 2006, 10:18:24 am by PsYhLo »

Offline byo

  • Plugin developer
  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2006, 01:19:09 pm »
i found this in src\plugins\contrib\wxSmith\new\defwidgets\wxsheaders.h

Some other file but I've found it in few seconds ;)

the << must not be there

true, true  :D  It will be fixed after next commit :)

Offline MortenMacFly

  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 9489
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2006, 08:53:10 pm »
I just wanted to say that I'm very impressed by the progress of the new wxSmith. I've realised that there were "loads" of commits since the date of this topic's first post. Thus I'd like to ask the following: Do you think it's already time to do the switch to start the testing and (maybe) bug-reporting phase? But of course if you think that this:
But I must warn that this is still during development and older version must be used for designing wxWidgets forms. New version will simply not work.
...is still true it doesn't. I'm not pushing anything here, really - but it may (or may not) help already...?!
With regards, Morten.
Compiler logging: Settings->Compiler & Debugger->tab "Other"->Compiler logging="Full command line"
C::B Manual: http://www.codeblocks.org/docs/main_codeblocks_en.html
C::B FAQ: http://wiki.codeblocks.org/index.php?title=FAQ

Offline byo

  • Plugin developer
  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
Re: Rewritten wxSmith
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2006, 01:50:18 am »
I just wanted to say that I'm very impressed by the progress of the new wxSmith.
And I'm impressed by posts like this one :D. Since I don't have as much time to work on wxSmith as before I feel like it just goes to slow. But maybe it's like with games you've already played. Next time you know better what to do and do it faster ;)

Quote
Do you think it's already time to do the switch to start the testing and (maybe) bug-reporting phase?

I think that testing may start now. In previous state wxSmith was unable to open editors and other basic stuff. Currently it works, editors are almost done. Some featres and widgets are still missing but the worst part of rewrite is done. And of course there are bugs - sometimes really annoying and hard to find (especially OS-specific). And here I'm waiting for bug reports :)

If anyone is interested in testing here are some guidelines:
  • try creating new resources rather than opening project from current wxSmith version. Data structures has changed in some cases and I haven't checked the code yet so testing old projects may be waste of time
  • the best place to send bug reports is of course berlios :). I think there's no new category needed for "new" wxSmith. To distinguish beetwen versions, just put [NEW WXSMITH] in summary for bugs in new version.
  • if anyone look into source code and find some code weird / unclear, outdated / ambigous / unclear documentation, badly selected names etc let me know. I don't want such mess since it will surely become a bug in future, so it's also kind of bug-testing ;)
  • I haven't adopted sources to coding guidelines :oops:, please don't blame me for that . I've left it to the end of redesign

And what's most important (especially for me): Thanx for testing :D