Re: [boost] A BOOST GUI Library

From: Jesse Jones (jesjones_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-03 00:55:10

At 5:41 PM -0700 4/2/01, Phlip wrote:
>Proclaimed Jesse Jones from the mountaintops:
>
>>  There's Whisper,
>>  <http://www.halcyon.com/www3/jesjones/Whisper/Home.html>. I'm biased
>>  but it leverages C++ better than any framework I've ever seen. It's
>>  Mac/Win32 only though...
>>
>>  It makes heavy use of template callback objects, STL, standard
>>  strings, exceptions, design by contract, XML to stream in views, and
>>  compile-time type checking of events. Whisper 2.0 also has a COM like
>>  object library that isn't nearly as lame as classic COM. I've been
>>  using it to great effect to define widgets. It brings many of the
>>  advantages of a more dynamic language than traditional C++ and also
>>  makes it possible to write modular apps.
>
>Is it Test-First?

The backend has a lot of unit tests, but there aren't any GUI unit tests.

>One FAQ on the ExtremeProgramming fora is "how do I CodeUnitTestFirst a
>GUI?" Once when folks were providing the standard answers (either Don't or
>Just Muddle Thru) Kent Beck replied that we never expect enough of our
>tools.

That's certainly true.

>If a UI were invented via TestDrivenDesign from scratch, you could easily
>extend it to test your specific UI forms first too.
>
>It's just a thought...
>
Unit testing something like a string class is simple and very worth 
while. Unit testing a push button on the other hand is much more 
complex since the inputs are things like mouse clicks, drags, and 
keystrokes and a button isn't a stand-alone object. Also most of the 
button code is part of vendor toolkits so there's less of a need for 
unit testing...

   -- Jesse