On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Thomas Wood<t...@gnome.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 10:42 -0500, Cody Russell wrote: >> Right, but I guess that's part of the point of all this. Wouldn't it >> make more sense if we try to move this type of information into a >> single location instead of having these kind of work-arounds? > > Correct, my point was really that there seem to be two distinct data > sets needed: one mutually exclusive set and one that isn't.
semantically speaking, what aspects of a widget's "state" in the broadest possible sense are required to be mutually exclusive? from my perspective (partially as reporter of http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=407215), this just seems to be a hangover of a misconception that was made early in GTK's design. its hard for me to see anything other than active/inactive sensitive/insensitive that are required to be mutually exclusive. its only "paired states" that require this kind of thing, and if we have 2 of them already, thats probably just about enough. am i missing something? _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list