Hans Breuer writes:
> BTW: I'd appreciate if somebody with a deeper understanding of gtk internals
> could do a review of gtktrayicon-win32.c. Maybe what I've done is considered
> too much of a hack ;-)
I appreciate your work, but why the rush?
Isn't it better to wait some time and let the X11 implementation
mature first? It isn't exactly like GTK 2.10 would be close to
release. GTK+ 2.8 is the stable version, and 2.6 is even more stable
on Win32. (At least, unless you use a fresh CVS snapshot of
pango-1-10). Are you using HEAD as your "production" environment?
Didn't we have some problems in the last cycle when gtkfilesystemwin32
was copy-pasted from gtkfilesystemunix before the latter was "ready",
and then subsequent improvements to gtkfilesystemunix didn't get
mirrored in gtkfilesystemwin32? I don't recall the details, sorry.
* gdk/win32/gdkwindow-win32.c(gdk_window_set_urgency_hint) : only use
only use (WINVER >= 0x0500) when available from the SDK. Otherwise fall
back to true dynamic linking of FlashWindowEx. Makes gtk+ work on NT4.0
again - if compiled properly.
Hmm, why should we use different *code* depending on the *compilation*
environment? (I understand ifdefs for preprocessor defines or type
definitions that aren't present in older headers.) Wouldn't it be
better here to use the dynamic lookup of FlashWindowEx() all the time
then, so that the code would work on NT4 even if built against fresher
headers? (Is FlashWindowEx() really the only Win32 API we use that
isn't present in NT4?)
--tml
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
