On 07/14/10 21:48, deokjin kim wrote:
My question is
1. What’s the reason of above code? (why break is prohibited when
break_type is G_UNICODE_BREAK_SPACE?)
That's by design, and what Unicode Line Breaking Algorithm specifies.
2. Do you know good solution? (fore reference, I used
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Paul Davis p...@linuxaudiosystems.comwrote:
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 3:24 AM, richard boaz ivor.b...@gmail.com wrote:
yep, i concur with the set sensitive method.
all good, except that in an ideal world, the sensitivity changes are
applied to GtkAction's, not
Hi to all,
How i can to cut one GdkPixbuf from another
___
gtk-list mailing list
gtk-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 01:17:21PM +0200, maxim maxim wrote:
How i can to cut one GdkPixbuf from another
gdk_pixbuf_new_subpixbuf()
And possibly gdk_pixbuf_copy() if you want to modify the subpixbuf
independently.
Yeti
___
gtk-list mailing list
Hi
#pragma omp parallel for private(i) shared(pdt_a)
for(i=0;ipsize;i++)
pdt_a[i]= g_hash_table_new(g_str_hash, compare_strings);
It gives the following errors. Somebody can help me out of here. How do i
make this hashtable thread safe?
GLib-ERROR **: gmem.c:154: failed
On 21 September 2010 12:20, Qingpeng Niu niuqingp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
#pragma omp parallel for private(i) shared(pdt_a)
for(i=0;ipsize;i++)
pdt_a[i]= g_hash_table_new(g_str_hash, compare_strings);
It gives the following errors. Somebody can help me out of here. How
hi
Thank you for replying. I do not call that function. You mean in main thread
call that function? Could you give me some simple example? I see this
function has some thread safe explaination.
g_hash_table_ref ()
Atomically increments the reference count of *hash_table* by one. This
function is
On 21 September 2010 13:30, Qingpeng Niu niuqingp...@gmail.com wrote:
hi
Thank you for replying. I do not call that function. You mean in main
thread call that function?
Read http://library.gnome.org/devel/glib/stable/glib-Threads.html
Cheers
Lex
Could you give me some simple example?
Am 19.09.2010 15:16, schrieb Torsten Schoenfeld:
utf8::decode() fixes this because it sets the utf8 flag (and avoids
double encoding).
Does this mean that it is safe to keep my workaround (utf8::decode) even
though the error gets fixed in a new release?
On 20.09.2010, at 09:58, Mario Kemper wrote:
Am 19.09.2010 15:16, schrieb Torsten Schoenfeld:
utf8::decode() fixes this because it sets the utf8 flag (and avoids
double encoding).
Does this mean that it is safe to keep my workaround (utf8::decode)
even though the error gets fixed in a new
10 matches
Mail list logo