Re: Why initialize the menubar without Interface Builder

FROM : Erik Buck
DATE : Sun Nov 04 03:15:08 2007

--- Chris Hanson <<email_removed>> wrote:

> On Nov 3, 2007, at 6:10 PM, Erik Buck wrote:
>
> > If you have more than three developers who need to
> > edit a single nib file, you have a serious
> problem.
>
> This is not always the case.  Perhaps two developers
> want to make non-
> overlapping changes to the same user interface.
> This is perfectly 
> well accommodated by either writing the code for the
> user interface 
> directly (instead of using Interface Builder), or by
> using a format 
> that has been designed to be diff-able and
> merge-able from the ground 
> up like XAML.  You don't even need layout managers
> or anything like 
> that, just a way of representing the object graph
>
> This is one of those cases where there really is no
> trade-off: 
> Interface Builder *could* support textual nib files
> that *do* handle 
> diff and merge straight from SCM tools reasonably
> well.  It just 
> *doesn't*.  No capabilities of the current system
> would be lost, and 
> there would be straightforward developer benefit for
> what are becoming 
> increasingly common cases.
>


I agree completely.

[deleted]

> > I don't think these problems with IB and nibs
> raise to
> > the level where I would prefer to hard code all
> > aspects of a GUI.
>
> I don't think they do either.  However, that it's
> possible to hard-
> code everything specified in a nib, and that the
> hard-coded version is 
> diff-able and merge-able via textual SCM tools, is a
> proof that nibs 
> themselves could be diff-able and merge-able via
> textual SCM tools.


Again. I agree completely.