comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question [message #34786 is a reply to message #34782]

Sun, 20 April 2003 14:04

R.Bauer
Messages: 1424
Registered: November 1998

Senior Member

David Fanning wrote:

> Reimar Bauer (R.Bauer@fz-juelich.de) writes:
>
>> I like very much the I of idl it stands for interactive.
>> For my opinion objects can't be interactive they are always well planned.
>>
>> The people starting with idl are almost very different in learning and
>> working with idl. In most cases my feeling is if they can theireselfs
>> work a bit on a solution without reading many books or asking a lot of
>> people for help they like idl more.
>
> I'm not sure how this discussion got turned in the
> direction of objects. I'm pretty sure it started out
> as a discussion of how to write a modal dialog widget.
> But the fact that it did encourages me. I've learned
> in my programming therapy sessions that talking about
> something is the first step in the process of accepting it. :-)

Dear David,

you are right! I was inspired myself several times by the first big library
I found from Ray Sterner especially the idea of a common timeaxis.

It's absolut correct thats there is a gap between the existing objects and a
catalyst library. And it takes always more time to write library routines
useful for others too against a "closed application".

If you have a more detailed look at our library you find some routines which
are based on more than hundred library routines. For me and some others it
is extremly easy to build a very complex program dependend on the existing
libraries. During the programming there are always new simple
library-routines are created to solve the main problem. Some are small some
are large. But after you have done this once you save a lot of time and all
the others which understands what's the library did saves time too.
Sometimes I wonder how much routines really are depended to an easy or
simple program. (A while ago I have solved one of the live tools I don't
know at the moment which one it was but it has dependcies to more than two
thousands routines)

What is your estimation in teaching people never have programmed before.
At the moment my feeling is if we don't start with objects by beginners it
is more difficult to get them later to work on objects too.
But on the other hand if someone has only small time to solve his problems
by idl without a "catalyst object library" it would better for him to show
him the "object free idl".

I think teaching objects will be always nearly the same as teaching of
writing library routines. In objects there is quite no difference between
this. But normally we try to teach people to use idl dependent on the idl
commands because they work in very different places with several of
different problems. We don't have libraries to solve all their problems. So
I believe it is better to show them how to build routines to solve their
own problems. (There is another yearly seminar for our people about the
increasing icg library)

But I believe it is very hard to teach a beginner the clever usage of
objects in idl with the momentanly existing objects.

I hope this discussion helps to form an opinion how we should proceed
teaching the next classes.

best regards

Reimar

--
Forschungszentrum Juelich
email: R.Bauer@fz-juelich.de
http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-i/
============================================================ ======
a IDL library at ForschungsZentrum Juelich
http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-i/idl_icglib/idl_lib_intro. html

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question By: David Fanning on Mon, 21 April 2003 07:47
		Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question By: R.Bauer on Sun, 20 April 2003 14:04
		Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question By: David Fanning on Sat, 19 April 2003 09:34
		Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question By: rmoss4 on Sat, 19 April 2003 08:49
		Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question By: Richard French on Wed, 23 April 2003 06:38

Previous Topic:	Pie Charts in IDL
Next Topic:	Re: METEOSAT navigation

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Nov 29 10:59:41 PST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.64191 seconds