Thank you Quentin,
but at GNUstep we prefer not to have a direct contact with Apple code or
headers. I personaly think, that looking at headers should not be to
problematic, but after the recent development with SCO we cannot be to
careful. So please don't send any more information that has
Thank you Quentin,
but at GNUstep we prefer not to have a direct contact with Apple code or
headers. I personaly think, that looking at headers should not be to
problematic, but after the recent development with SCO we cannot be to
careful. So please don't send any more information that has
Thank you Quentin,
but at GNUstep we prefer not to have a direct contact with Apple code or
headers. I personaly think, that looking at headers should not be to
problematic, but after the recent development with SCO we cannot be to
careful. So please don't send any more information that has
Alexander Malmberg wrote:
Kazunobu Kuriyama wrote:
--- gui/Headers/AppKit/NSImageCell.h2003-12-29 13:57:42.0 +0900
[snip]
+ int _tag;
+ id _target;
+ SEL _action;
+ id _control_view;
However, the general idea was to add target and action. Adding a tag and
a control view
Fred Kiefer wrote:
Alexander Malmberg wrote:
Kazunobu Kuriyama wrote:
--- gui/Headers/AppKit/NSImageCell.h2003-12-29
13:57:42.0 +0900
[snip]
+ int _tag;
+ id _target;
+ SEL _action;
+ id _control_view;
However, the general idea was to add target and action. Adding a tag
Kazunobu Kuriyama wrote:
[snip]
Could someone please check it and judge whether it is acceptable
or not?
Well, having had time to think about it, I think the general idea is ok,
although the situation is unfortunate. Detailed comments:
--- gui/Headers/AppKit/NSImageCell.h2003-12-29
Alexander Malmberg wrote:
+// Target and Action
+//
+// N.B: These methods are overridden so that the instances doesn't raise an
+// exception when they receive a target or action message.
This comment is very misleading (in the same way that confused the
original discussion about this). The
Hi,
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
All,
We should remain the same as MOSX, and leave the class heirarchy alone.
NSImageCell is, according to Apple's latest docs, a subclass of NSCell. Why
they did it this way, I'm not sure since NSActionCell would make more sense.
I realize that this
Kazunobu,
See below...
--- Kazunobu Kuriyama [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
... my assertion from previous email about maintaining compatibility ...
In addition to the comment above, if someone could give another
one on how an implementation using NSActionCell
Hi,
In a word, your comment is just broader point of view I've
been seeking for since this thread began. Now I'm in favor
of the idea that NSImageCell should be a direct subclass of
NSCell. I can't be against it any more.
In particular, what is written in the header file is definitely
decisive.
Hi,
Attached are revised patches to make NSImageView receive -setTarget:
-setAction methods and invoke the action when an image on another view
is dragged and dropped onto an NSImageView in question.
According to two suggestions I got so far, each of whic by Alexander
11 matches
Mail list logo
