On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Thomas Wood wrote:
> I think the current GTK+ states are correct as an enum. They are single
> user or application activatable states of which the widget cannot be in
> more than one state at once (normal, insensitive, active, prelight).
But then we get workarou
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 07:46 -0500, Cody Russell wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Thomas Wood wrote:
> I think the current GTK+ states are correct as an enum. They
> are single
> user or application activatable states of which the widget
> cannot be in
>
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 14:21 +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 07:46 -0500, Cody Russell wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Thomas Wood wrote:
> > I think the current GTK+ states are correct as an enum. They
> > are single
> > user or application act
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Wood wrote:
> Why would you have active and prelight at the same time? The two states
> are mutually exclusive. One indicates the user is holding the mouse
> button down on a widget, the other indicates that the mouse is
> "hovering" over the widget.
I fear
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 15:01 +0100, Neil Jagdish Patel wrote:
>
> Sounds like the checkbox is "active" (checked), and the user is hovering
> over it, hence prelight. Not sure that's how it currently works, though.
>
This is not how it works in GTK+. The "checked" state is indicated by
the GtkShad
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 10:02 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Wood wrote:
>
> > Why would you have active and prelight at the same time? The two states
> > are mutually exclusive. One indicates the user is holding the mouse
> > button down on a widget, the oth
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 15:11 +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 15:01 +0100, Neil Jagdish Patel wrote:
> >
> > Sounds like the checkbox is "active" (checked), and the user is hovering
> > over it, hence prelight. Not sure that's how it currently works, though.
> >
>
> This is not h
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 15:17 +0100, Neil Jagdish Patel wrote:
> Right. Although in my mind the checkbox is active when in that state
> (same for radiobuttons), so it would make sense to have a bit-field for
> states.
Yup, this is why I suggested using an enum for the generic states that
are mutuall
On Sat, 2009-08-15 at 10:07 -0400, Morten Welinder wrote:
> > FWIW, Sugar uses zip quite extensively to bundle content and software
> > and we would love to move from using python's zipfile to something
> > glib-based.
>
> Why all this reinvent-the-wheel effort? libgsf gives you access
> to zipfi
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 14:21 +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 07:46 -0500, Cody Russell wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Thomas Wood wrote:
> > I think the current GTK+ states are correct as an enum. They
> > are single
> > user or application act
Hey,
A while ago this bug report was made:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=534611
More recent (but still a year back) this bug report was made to have a
workaround for the above mentioned bug:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=546839
Back in the days from those bug reports i al
> Does libgsf use the GIO APIs?
It can take a GFile* and treat that as a zipfile. The way you
would read from the zipfile member files would not be GFile*
based. For the output side, turn all that around.
Does that answer your question?
M.
___
gtk-de
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 10:58 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
>
> What happens when you hover over a pressed-in togglebutton?
In GTK+ you get GTK_SHADOW_IN and GTK_STATE_PRELIGHT. In a hypothetical
new API the state would be "prelight" and the bitfield flags would
include "checked".
>
> (As Matthias sa
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Thomas Wood wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 15:01 +0100, Neil Jagdish Patel wrote:
> >
> > Sounds like the checkbox is "active" (checked), and the user is hovering
> > over it, hence prelight. Not sure that's how it currently works, though.
> >
>
> This is not how
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
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Thomas Wood 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
Also see bug 407215, http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=407215, for
further discussion related to these points, especially respecting the
prelight state.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Widget-states-for-3.0-%28and-2.18-%29-tp24997096p25014045.html
Sent from the Gtk
GTK+ 2.17.8 is now available for download at:
ftp://ftp.gtk.org/pub/gtk/2.17/
http://download.gnome.org/sources/gtk+/2.17/
md5 sums:
7e0a37e4cc40f74963886031d0df2182 gtk+-2.17.8.tar.bz2
26c392c1b90ce415cdae95c115378873 gtk+-2.17.8.tar.gz
sha1 sums:
117be5783a6434dad21d71c62111c97a1715bfd4 g
18 matches
Mail list logo
