> >Anyway, it could be rewritten to either not use XML at all,
> or to not
> >use wxxml (say by linking directly to libxml, which is
> likely to be on
> >the system already considering how many packages use it). It
> just makes
> >it easier when you don't have to maintain the code youself.
> >
> >
> There must be some XML stuff in std wx, since XRC uses XML,
> dunno how reusable that is.
It specifically says that the API is not stable and should not be used.
(http://cvs.wxwidgets.org/viewcvs.cgi/wxWidgets/include/wx/xml/xml.h?rev
=1.5&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup and friends)
> >As for the fact that you can already store them in standard files -
> >sure you can. It's a matter of convenience.
> >
> Still appears as a duplication of features. What's wrong with
> "recent files"?
No hierarchy, very very limited number of entries, no control over which
entries go on the list (say when you open a one-time file to run, it
will still steal a position on the list), no ability to add descriptive
entries. I'm sure there are more, but that's what I came up with whlie
typing without needing to think about it.
> Actually, I'd like it better to have a means of adding
> macros/scripts or so to pgAdmin, i.e. wxPython. This would
> enable pgAdmin extensions, keeping the pgAdmin core relatively pure.
Sure, that'd be nice. Still, that adds a dependency on *python*, which
is *huge* compared to wxxml...
And I don't see the point in this case. Yes, macro etc would be great
functionality, but it's not a replacement for builtin features. If it
was, why not rewrite pgadmin in python?
//Magnus
