Ichthyostega
2e4cd56f4f
Partially as a leftover from the way more ambitious initial design, we ended up with CanvasHook as an elaboration/specialisation of the ViewHook abstraction. However, as it stands, this design is tilted, since CanvasHook is not just an elaboration, but rather a variation of the same basic idea. And this is now more like a building pattern and less of a generic framework, it seems adequate to separate these two variations completely, even if this incurs a small amount of code duplication. Actually this refactoring is necessary to resolve a bug, where we ended up with the same Clip widgets attached two times to the same Canvas control, one time through the ViewHook baseclass, and a second time by the ctor of the "derived" CanvasHook |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| ctrl | ||
| interact | ||
| model | ||
| test | ||
| abstract-tangible-test.cpp | ||
| bus-term-test.cpp | ||
| gen-node-location-query.hpp | ||
| README | ||
| session-structure-mapping-test.cpp | ||
| test-gui-test.cpp | ||
GUI backbone tests The tests in this subtree are a bit special: they cover the generic and backbone internals of the Lumiera GTK GUI. They are linked against the complete GUI-module (gui plugin), and thus may use all related ABIs. Yet these tests are *deliberately* compiled without any GTK, GTKmm or SigC includes. This effectively rules out the use, even indirectly, of any GTK widgets and APIs -- forcing the covered GUI backbone entities to stay clean and generic at API level. This is a decision done on purpose. The concrete GUI framework technology shall be treated as an implementation detail. There is no point in writing tests which click buttons in the GUI -- better delegate any significant logic or functionality to GUI agnostic components. GUI is meant to be a presentation layer and must not develop intelligence on its own.