From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,658cbf6222fa4bf5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: tmoran@bix.com (Tom Moran)
Subject: Re: OO and large packages
Date: 1998/04/24
Message-ID: <3540ac93.302795@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 347322426
References: <353f7983.1926480@SantaClara01.news.InterNex.Net>
Organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-04-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


>You could look at the (by now conventional) approach of
>Xaw/Motif/Tk/Java, and for all I know MS-Windows, and regard the outer
>window as a container for window interface components or widgets
>(which may of course be themselves containers, recursively, but
  This is a painting/drawing sort of window, so on input it needs to
handle mouse movement and buttons, keyboard, and menu.  On output it
needs to draw various things.  Then there is the general window
housekeeping.  It makes for a large package and doesn't break into
obvious pieces.
.
  The question is more general, though: Do non-trivial OO objects
always lead to large packages.