Re: [RFC] [PATCH]: Icon themability patch for -GUI images/icons

[Alex Perez]

Fred Kiefer wrote:
> Alex Perez wrote:
>
> > This patch builds upon a previous non-behavior-changing patch which I 
> > wrote and Alexander Malmberg comitted this morning on my behalf. For 
> > some background:
> >
> > NSWorkspace had a private convenience class called _getImageWithName: 
> > which, with the permission of Alexander Malmberg, we moved to NSImage 
> > and renamed to -standardImageWithName: and modified slightly so the 
> > alternate: argument was not necessary (it now intelligently looks for 
> > "ImageName" and then for "common_ImageName" (and anything else for 
> > that matter, like "camaelon_ImageName", if you override the method.) 
> > In any event, What this patch does is enable icon themability. You can 
> > have sets of icons which you can use by simply having a very small 
> > bundle override the -getImageWithName: method.
> >
> > This patch builds upon the previous one, by making nearly every single 
> > image which was previously loaded directly via NSImage -imageNamed: 
> > "common_ImageName" load with the new convenience NSImage method.
> >
> > Unless you want your own icon set, you will notice zero behavioral 
> > change.
> >
> > Everyone, please comment on this...If I don't hear anything negative 
> > from anyone by tuesday or so of next week, I will commit it as-is. It 
> > works on my machine.
>
> Sorry to repeat myself, but NSImage has been themable all the time. 
> There is the file nsmapping.strings in gui/Images, which defines which 
> file name will be used instead of a given image name. What else would 
> you need for themability?
> Yes, the problem is that this feature is currently not widely used in 
> GNUstep GUI and in the GNUstep applications. Hard coded image names are 
> often used in them. Do you expect the introduction of an additional API, 
> which you even expect to be overwritten in theme bundles to resolve this?

This method is far more flexible then the nsmapping.strings which IMHO 
is a shoddy solution at best, does not allow for multiple sets of icons 
to be easily loaded/unloaded, etc. Alexander Malmberg even suggested 
discussing the possibility of removing it, and personally I agree with 
both him and Nicolas Roard, that it "adds complexity for not much added 
value". To reiterate: you are incorrect in asserting that an additional 
API was created. Nothing extra was created; it was only moved, renamed 
as the suggestion of alexander malmberg, and very slightly improved upon.

> Sorry, I am actually getting bored of this and most other 
> pseudo-discussions going on in the GNUstep mailing lists. Perhaps I 
> should think about dropping out of them.

It's up to you, but if you feel the need to disparage a new contribution 
instead of explaining in a reasonable manner why you disagree with said 
contribution, maybe it would be for the best.

Cheers,
Alex Perez