David Abrahams wrote:
You're still missing the point. The fact that the owning window constructs the child is an implementation detail that has nothing to do with the window structure/layout the user is trying to represent. The syntax for describing a window should be declarative, not imperative.
David Turner responded:
I'm well aware of the fact that owner windows are an implementation detail. I also know full well that if I wanted to, I could cope with a change of ownership.
I think you are missing the point a tiny bit. David (lot of those here...) Abrahams tried to accentuate the syntactical/expressionist properties of the GUI tree. I too think you gain a lot by keeping them as ASTs as long as possible, which are subsequently traversed by the particular GUI implementation (in your case, the "window" instance.) I would not go that far to suggest the use of BGL to express the abstractly syntactical tree, but almost ;-) Just to make sure there are no wrapper glues in that part. /David