Howto talk:Coding a simple Nasal Framework: Difference between revisions

From FlightGear wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:


--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 14:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 14:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
:: I feel that the whole subject of creating a Nasal framework could become an exercise in futility, and should even be discouraged in favour of writing code within the core framework. Nasal simply does not have the suitable debugging tools which could make it a big winner. A large piece of code could easily become unmaintainable in case the original developer left. Case in point: local weather.
::[[User:Adrian|Adrian]] ([[User talk:Adrian|talk]])

Revision as of 18:55, 24 July 2014

Todo: Considerations for creating Canvas Widgets

  • benefits of creating widgets
  • supporting multiple instances
  • creating multiple windows of a widget
  • creating a window/dialog with multiple widgets (tabs?)
  • all Canvas-based instruments/MFDs should support GUI-based viewing, without requiring a cockpit/aircraft-even if it's just for testing/development purposes (profiling)
  • every widget must support rendering to a customizable context/canvas, so that recursion is fully supported, i.e. dialogs showing instruments with GUI elements

--Hooray (talk) 14:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I feel that the whole subject of creating a Nasal framework could become an exercise in futility, and should even be discouraged in favour of writing code within the core framework. Nasal simply does not have the suitable debugging tools which could make it a big winner. A large piece of code could easily become unmaintainable in case the original developer left. Case in point: local weather.
Adrian (talk)