RE: [Wxruby-dev] Group vote on naming questions

[Kevin Smith]

On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 05:29, repeater wrote:
> -One must just make sure that with WxSomething there is no Something that
> conflicts with Ruby (and that is something that may bite you as the
> wxWindows team add something later, like wxInteger)

Yes, I just had the same thought last night. I realized that the root
class in wxWindows is wxObject. It's not actually used much (Park didn't
even implement it at all), but could definitely cause confusion if we
tried to have a Wx::Object class.

So it seems like we really need to go one of two completely different
directions. Either need to tell people NOT to "include 'Wx'", in which
case they would have Wx::Window and Wx::SUNKEN_BORDER, or we need to
tell people they really SHOULD do "include 'Wx'" and use WxWindow and
WX_SUNKEN_BORDER. Otherwise they'll end up with just Window, or with
Wx::WxWindow, neither of which are great.

I'm not entirely happy with it, but I guess I now think that the class
names should remain WxWindow, and constants should become
WX_SUNKEN_BORDER. Sigh.

I suppose that also means that for consistency, the module-level
functions should be named wx_message_box instead of just message_box.
Dang. I'll have to undo some of what I did last night.

> Kevin, have you considered how to make the interface more Rubyesque, or do
> you think that is something better left for a later revision?

My first goal is a "straight port" that someone can use by referring to
the C++/Python wxWindows docs. After that, I definitely want to make the
interface simpler, friendlier, and more Rubyesque. I'm considering
coding that upper layer in Ruby, so more Ruby folks can participate in
its development.

Thanks!

Kevin