[Gtk-sharp-list] TreeModel for ILists

[Adam Tauno Williams]

On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 16:25 +0200, Matjaž Mihelič wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 16:13 +0200, Christian Hoff wrote:
> > Matjaž Mihelič wrote:
> > > Update from my side. I got sidetracked for 6 days with my work and
> > > vacation. Now, working again on interface and I expect it finished in
> > > day or two
> > > On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 09:33 +0200, Christian Hoff wrote:
> > >> But I still think we should include IList support in Gtk# directly as 
> > >> there are many users who may only want to show a DataView, but do not 
> > >> want to depend on a full databinding project that is not packaged by 
> > >> many Linux distributions.
> > > yes it is nice addition, as long as we keep it as extension method in
> > > something like Gtk.Extensions. This way it is easy to include and
> > > excluded by default
> > I agree, we have to keep that stuff out of Gtk#. It was a bad idea to 
> > implement IList support in the gtk-sharp assembly. Data binding and the 
> > bindings for Gtk+ should be seperated cleanly.
> > > and use it like
> > > myTreeView.SetItems (myListOrDatabase);

I personally like how the ListView in Hyena solves this solution [see
the thread at <http://www.nabble.com/Re%
3A-Sorting-and-Filtering-NodeStore-p20548458ef1367.html>]  IMO, Banshee
has created some great, and under appreciated, Gtk# code.

> > I wonder if that can be done without compiling the assembly against .net 
> > 3.5. Apparently it seems to be possible to compile extension methods 
> > with the .net 2.0 profile, but any application wanting to use them will 
> > have to target 3.5, if I'm correct (though it would still be possible to 
> > call them as static methods).

Is targeting the current .NET rev really a problem?  Is anyone, in
practice, actually sticking to older revs?  Especially in regards to
shipping a new assembly with a new [?] API?

> > > I for one love that very much and would love if some light databinding
> > > would be deployed with gtk-sharp. as long as it is extension and part of
> > > another assembly (if it would be in gtk#... then databinding interface
> > > would have no meaning).
> > Yes, data binding functionality has been neglected for quite some time. 
> > It is a part of a every good UI toolkit. I'm confident that we can add 
> > at least some basic stuff in its seperate assembly.
> lol????? Neglected? I wonder what have I been doing for almost 3 years;)

I assume we are talking about <http://gtk-databind.sourceforge.net/> ?