On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 18:15 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Murray Cumming
> wrote:
> > Will there absolutely positively never be any GTK+ 3.23/24
> > releases?
> >
> > After all these years of not adding API, or deprecating API, in
gtkmm 3.24 that
adds and deprecates API without causing too much confusion in the
future.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel
've never liked how applications have all these magic values
sprinkled through their code.
Thanks for the explanation.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://ma
care yet.
So, applications shouldn't generally need to specify any spacing at all
between child widgets in containers? For instance
- Gtk::Box::spacing
- margin of child widgets in a Gtk::ActionBar
- Gtk::Grid column-spacing and row-spacing
?
GTK 3 and GTK 4 themes are separate, ri
On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 17:50 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 17:20 +0200, Timm Bäder wrote:
> > I've added notes about the fill and expand child properties to the
> > migration guide:
> > https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/commit/?id=bb1
about hexpand/vexpand affecting the
parent widgets too that explains what I've seen so far. So there is
really no simple mapping from the old API to the new API. Porting is
going to be rather awkward.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
___
e old fill/expand combinations
to the new halign/valign/hexpand/vexpand properties to the migrating
guide?
https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/docs/reference/gtk/migrating-3to
4.xml
There are only 4 possible fill/expand combinations, only 3 of which
ever made sense, so this should be doable.
rted or corrected in subsequent
commits. It is not nice to break ABI.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
ht
.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 20:34 +0300, LRN wrote:
> Previously g_app_info_reset_type_associations()
> was a dummy, now it's just missing.
Surely that's a regression then.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally sig
gt; g_app_info_reset_type_associations()
>
> Just flagging this up in case you need to liaise with the glibmm devs.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
en you can get it anywhere you like.
I don't know why gtk_recent_manager_new() even exists.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
rty.
This screenshot shows the result in Glade with some GtkBoxes and a
GtkSizeGroup, and the correct behaviour in a GtkGrid. Should it work
with a GtkSizeGroup?
I can't just use a GtkGrid because I am actually using a custom
container in my application.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
On Wed, 2014-03-05 at 12:41 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 07:40 +0100, Tarnyko wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Just some news on the Win32 - bundle distribution - side.
> >
> > Main URL :
> > http://win32builder.gnome.org/
> &g
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 07:40 +0100, Tarnyko wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Just some news on the Win32 - bundle distribution - side.
>
> Main URL :
> http://win32builder.gnome.org/
>
> The continuous build environment now generates 64-bit bundles.
> The bundle for GTK+ 3.10.x has been generated.
[
And I have not found a way to specify a tooltip for a menu item with
GMenu/GAction/GtkBuilder, as an equivalent for the tooltip parameter to
gtk_action_new():
https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/unstable/GtkAction.html#gtk-action-new
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus
On Wed, 2013-09-11 at 12:10 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> hi;
>
> On 11 September 2013 11:39, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> >> This deprecated several classes (GtkIconFactory, GtkIconSet,
> >> GtkIconSource, GtkImageMenuItem, GtkAction, GtkUIManager).
> >
&g
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 11:47 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 09:41 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > As some of you may have noticed we have recently deprecated Stock
> > Items in master.
> >
> >
>
On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 11:08 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> I'm trying to convert code from GtkUIManager+GtkMenu to GtkBuilder
> +GMenu. Is there anything I'm doing wrong in the attached example? The
> menu items are disabled.
Ah nevermind. I needed to use 'somemen
I'm trying to convert code from GtkUIManager+GtkMenu to GtkBuilder
+GMenu. Is there anything I'm doing wrong in the attached example? The
menu items are disabled.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
#include
cons
the standard icon names such as "dialog-error",
wouldn't it still be useful to have some new macros for the standard
icon names, to avoid typos?
Otherwise, the compiler can't help us to know if a standard icon name is
really a standard icon name.
--
Murray Cumming
m
want to duplicate that list.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 13:52 -0300, Juan Pablo Ugarte wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 12:55 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 11:23 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > in general, GtkUIManager should be replaced by GtkBuilder, so that
> >
merge in, and later remove
and replace, menu items? I used this with GtkUIManager to dynamically
populate a menu with items not known at compile time.
I see gtk_builder_add_from_string(), but I don't see how to remove items
without destroying the entire GtkBuilder structure.
--
Murra
recation comments for the individual methods just
say that they are deprecated without any further advice. For instance:
https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/unstable/GtkUIManager.html#gtk-ui-manager-new
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
_
GLib.
>
> If it's of interest, I'd like to start discussing and designing the API
> with interested parties.
>
> Cheers
>
> [1]: http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/offline/storage/#indexed-db
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus
aller would be nice to have, but is hardly the major problem.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
+ branch when nobody is left around to maintain it, provided said
> user can get at a sufficiently old windows version (let's not pretend
> current mingw build envs will just work on future windows versions,
> see what happened when vista got released for example)...
I suggest that thi
indows.
> Maybe someday I (or somebody else) will even
> find the time to get that done ;)
Here's hoping. Thanks.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnom
Is anyone any closer to having a Windows installer for GTK+ 3 ready?
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel
lude/glibmm-2.4/glibmm/thread.h:1072: warning:
> 'g_private_new' is deprecated (declared at
> /Users/paul/gtk/inst/include/glib-2.0/glib/deprecated/gthread.h:231)
I would prefer to have this discussion on the gtkmm-list or in bugzilla.
Anyway, these look like a problem in
eveloper.gnome.org/gdk3/3.4/gdk3-Threads.html#gdk-threads-enter
Is it still planned?
> The removal will come in GTK4. There will be no replacement
> functionality -- you will just be expected to do all your interaction
> with the toolkit from the main thread (ie: dispatching res
s - will reverting this change cause more harm now, or is it the
> right thing to do ?
I am confused about what change you actually made. Did you change the C
API?
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-deve
n in
operand of '&' [-Wparentheses]
gsignal.c:3171:10: warning: variable 'signal_id' set but not used
[-Wunused-but-set-variable]
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-devel-list mai
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 10:37 +0100, Dieter Verfaillie wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:48:51 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 12:53 +0100, Dieter Verfaillie wrote:
> >> I maintain
> >> http://www.optionexplicit.be/projects/gnome-windows/GTK+3/
&
On Thu, 2012-01-19 at 12:53 +0100, Dieter Verfaillie wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:44:53 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 15:19 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> >> The -win32 branch is now in a pretty good state and seems to be the
> >> best
>
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 17:30 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> I mostly agree with that. It certainly means nobody is validating
> these files at build/install time.
I am, but not against any DTD:
http://www.murrayc.com/blog/permalink/2010/03/30/testing-glade-files/
though I would like to use a DTD.
>
.
What's happening with win32 support in GTK+ 3? Do you have any idea when
there will be binaries available, even for testing? I'd like to update
Glom's Windows installer.
--
Murray Cumming
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
__
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 13:26 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> By the way, I also noticed that g_thread_init() is deprecated,
> presumably because you must now used g_thread_new(), so you don't need
> it, but I don't see a deprecation comment on g_thread_init().
There ar
On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 22:18 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 15:12 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > hi Murray,
> >
> > I reverted this commit for now.
> >
> > Can you please open a bug to discuss this? I don't think your fix is
> >
On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 15:12 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Murray,
>
> I reverted this commit for now.
>
> Can you please open a bug to discuss this? I don't think your fix is
> correct since the extra field is never used anymore.
OK. It's here:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=662797
On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 20:05 -0200, Renato Merli wrote:
> Regarding last message... i am using 4.99 version of libgda, newer
> versions dont compile and are not the ones in use by c++ layer
> developers
gnome-db-l...@gnome.org is the libgda mailing list.
> 2011/10/20 Renato Merli :
> > Hi,
> >
> >
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 09:00 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi Murray,
>
> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 12:48 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > This change in glib master does indeed break glibmm:
> > http://git.gnome.org/browse/glib/commit/?id=d904612100120d12126f1a6623a106d8a5b02fa6
&g
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 08:58 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> hi
>
> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 13:26 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > By the way, I also noticed that g_thread_init() is deprecated,
> > presumably because you must now used g_thread_new(), so you don't need
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 12:48 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> This change in glib master does indeed break glibmm:
> http://git.gnome.org/browse/glib/commit/?id=d904612100120d12126f1a6623a106d8a5b02fa6
> Unless it's really really necessary, it would be great if you would not
> d
API, if we
can replace it with a more-correct Glib::Thread2 API, but we'll be in
trouble if user applications (built with glibmm <= 2.30) start crashing
just because the user installed glibmm 2.32.
--
Murray Cumming
murrayc@murrayc com
www.murray
On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 17:26 +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> I am subscribed to quite a few mailing list and this is the first time
> I saw such heavy-handed approach but it's your list and you are free
> to manage it as you see fit.
I'd like to see more of this kind of moderation and I trust Olav
On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 22:53 +0200, Andy Wingo wrote:
> At one point Johan Dahlin,
> who works with business applications, argued that GTK needed more
> businessy widgets -- reporting facilities, a spreadsheet-like table,
> etc.
[snip]
libgda-ui (in libgda), probably does most of this, or tries to
On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 23:42 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> libegg has lots of directories that have just a README saying how the
> code has successfully moved into GTK+. But that's mostly old news now.
> If there's no objection then I'll remove the directories so it'
On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 23:42 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> libegg has lots of directories that have just a README saying how the
> code has successfully moved into GTK+. But that's mostly old news now.
> If there's no objection then I'll remove the directories so it'
On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 11:48 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Murray Cumming wrote:
> >
> > I very much like the re-show-instead-of-reopening idea, and miss it
> > since I stopped using MacOS 7.3. However, I don't understand why this
&
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 10:27 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 10:51 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 20:03 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Murray Cumming
> > > wrote:
> > > > l
On Sat, 2011-03-19 at 09:44 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Hi Murray,
>
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> > For this and other unrelated reasons, I will remove Gtk::Application
> > from gtkmm 3.0.0. I can't wrap an API that I don't
On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 20:03 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > libegg has lots of directories that have just a README saying how the
> > code has successfully moved into GTK+. But that's mostly old news now.
> > If
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 20:04 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> But for applications that actually have some reason to have multiple
> windows (typically document-based applications) I still know of no
> reason why we would want to suggest that they should have all windows
> in
> one
libegg has lots of directories that have just a README saying how the
code has successfully moved into GTK+. But that's mostly old news now.
If there's no objection then I'll remove the directories so it's easier
to see at a glance what's still interesting.
--
murr...@murrayc.com
www.murrayc.com
On Fri, 2011-03-18 at 14:13 +0800, czk wrote:
> hello everyone,
> I use gtk+-3.0 in a embedded device. If I create a window put 4
> buttons , 4 entrys 3 labels in it, from gtk_window_new to the window
> was showed spend 4 seconds totally. It a long time for me. Most time
> spend in gtk_widget_show
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 18:41 +, Chris Vine wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:47:59 +0100
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > If it's most programs then surely you can give some example. I don't
> > think that most applications have to deal with caching, bookmarks, and
>
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 10:54 -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> > If it's most programs then surely you can give some example. I don't
> > think that most applications have to deal with caching, bookmarks, and
>
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 14:54 +, Chris Vine wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 14:48:12 +0100
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:59 +, Chris Vine wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > The case for having single-instance programs in most cases for
> > > prog
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:01 -0500, Morten Welinder wrote:
> > What global state, for instance?
>
> locale?
>
> As a reminder, setlocale is not thread-safe.
Sorry, I don't understand. Could you explain in more detail? Why would
two separate instances (separate processes) of the same app care if
s
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 09:59 +, Chris Vine wrote:
[snip]
> The case for having single-instance programs in most cases for
> programs with a GUI interface seems self-evident to me, since most
> GUI programs keep some running global state which would be extremely
> tedious to synchronise between d
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 17:55 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Morten Welinder wrote:
>
> > What actual problem was solved by all this infrastructure to keep just
> > one instance?
>
> Basically for any application which manipulates private files in any
> form (in Fir
On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 12:53 +0200, Claudio Saavedra wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 08:58 +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> > Note that we moved from single process model to multiple process
> > without changing the evince behaviour, it still behaves like a single
> > instance app, opening an alr
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 10:07 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
[snip]
> > Thanks for the suggestion, but why wouldn't you use the
> > GApplication::local_command_line vfunc for local command-line parsing?
> > http://library.gnome.org/devel/gio/unstable/GApplication.html#GApplicationClass.local-command-l
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 23:41 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On 2011-02-21 at 21:57, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> I'll leave the other points, as they've received a reply already.
>
> > 2.
> > How should we use GOptionContext to parse command line argum
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 17:51 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > 1.
> > Are we still meant to call gtk_init(&argc, &argv) when using
> > GtkApplication, which takes argc/argv again via g_application_run(). Or
> > is gtk_init() then superfluous?
>
> gtk_init is superfluous, yes;
I guess we should menti
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 21:57 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> I'm trying to wrap GtkApplication for gtkmm but I can't really do that
> until I understand how it's meant to be used.
>
> In general, I find the documentation lacks overview and advice, partly
> because it
I'm trying to wrap GtkApplication for gtkmm but I can't really do that
until I understand how it's meant to be used.
In general, I find the documentation lacks overview and advice, partly
because it's spread between GApplication and GtkApplication and mentions
some concepts without explaining them
On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 11:57 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> GTK+ 2.99.0 is now available for download at:
If it's possible, please, it would be nice to have another release soon.
Tristan has just fixed something that was making GtkTreeView completely
broken with gtkmm, and probably with any other
On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 22:53 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> There's one behavioural change, gtk_tree_view_set_cursor() when
> specifying "start_editing = TRUE" will no longer toggle the state
> of an activatable cell (this used to be the case, we thought it
> was an undesirable side effect since
On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 15:42 +0100, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> Hey :),
>
> I have just merged the gtk-style-context branch in master, here's the
> status of things:
>
> * The new API is fully functional, well documented, and used
> underneath GtkStyle, a few widgets are using it direct
On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 15:42 +0100, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> Hey :),
>
> I have just merged the gtk-style-context branch in master, here's the
> status of things:
>
> * The new API is fully functional, well documented, and used
> underneath GtkStyle, a few widgets are using it direct
On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 17:16 +0100, Philip Chimento wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 11:28, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > By the way, are there any other places where the java or C++ bindings do
> > "cleanup" changes like this? Some may be interesting to push into the
> > core now that we have the c
On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 12:50 +1200, John Stowers wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 01:48 +1200, John Stowers wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > First of all, PyGI and GObject introspection is the way forward.
> >
> > Now, that being said, it seems a little silly to spend all this effort
> > porting C apps in GNO
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 00:28 +0200, Javier Jardón wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> 2010/10/25 Martyn Russell :
> > On 25/10/10 19:45, Murray Cumming wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 09:36 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
>
> >> That shows vala
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 09:36 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> While adding the FreeBASIC language bindings to our language-bindings
> page¹, I noticed S-Lang and Harbour have not released for a while or
> have denounced their support for language bindings. This is just to let
> everyon
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 12:01 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 12:53 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> > > > I am ready to add this to libegg, but it seems to depend on GTK+ 2 only
> > > > right now, so do we want GTK+ 3 code there? If so, should I
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 09:56 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 10:48 +0200, David King wrote:
> > On 2010-10-14 11:52, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >If nobody says they want this soon then I guess we'll just put it in
> > >libegg.
> >
> &
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 17:18 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 08:54 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Oh, I see now it's a WrapBox replacement I guess (reading threads out of
> > order)
>
> Well, not quite. This one
On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 19:54 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 11:06 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 12:36 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > > Furthermore, the gimp's newer versions is now using GtkToolPalette
> > >
On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 19:48 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 11:04 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 23:31 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > > For what its worth I finally applied this algorithm
> > > to the 'spread-ta
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 12:36 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> Furthermore, the gimp's newer versions is now using GtkToolPalette
> in place of the older wrap-box (the gimp had been using a similar
> wrap-box widget to wrap items around in one of it's toolbars).
Shouldn't GtkToolPalette (and maybe
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 23:31 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> For what its worth I finally applied this algorithm
> to the 'spread-table' branch.
>
> In the case that the trailing columns get no
> widgets, one widget is placed in each of the trailing
> columns (again, only happens with lots of co
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 12:37 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> Hello list again,
>Now for the introduction of GtkSpreadTable (still open for
> a better name for this widget).
>
> What the spread table container does is takes a linear list
> of widgets, which can be of variable size and spread/
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 21:23 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 14:08 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 20:36 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 12:13 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2010
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 20:36 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 12:13 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 12:37 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > > Hello list again,
> > >Now for the introduction of GtkSpreadTable (still o
On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 08:54 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Oh, I see now it's a WrapBox replacement I guess (reading threads out of
> order)
Well, not quite. This one has a fixed number of columns (or rows,
depending on the orientation). That makes its layout quite different
than if th
On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 10:11 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 09:55 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> > We could just unref the underlying object, but once the wrapping C++
> > object has been destroyed, the vfuncs (and default signal handlers) will
> >
On Sun, 2010-09-26 at 16:08 +0200, Benjamin Otte wrote:
> - GtkObject is gone
> With the existance of GObject, GtkObject became unnecessary. The
> functions it provided are now either part of GObject or GtkWidget.
For gtkmm, I welcome this for the little GtkAdjustment, GtkFileFilter
and GtkRecent
I haven't followed this in detail, but I see the new GtkWidget align and
margin-* properties and functions:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk
+/commit/?id=474f80442a6f3cf72a3c3b9efc5a846e7664d758
So will things like gtk_alignment_set() be deprecated soon?
http://library.gnome.org/devel/gtk/unstable/
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 18:20 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> On 08/24/10 13:42, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > Is this a kind of widget that we are interested in adding to GTK+ ?
>
> What are the usecases for such a container? The selection of features looks a
> bit arbitrary to me.
I wanted it fo
I'm trying to fix the gtkmm 3 build against gtk+ 3 from git master.
gdk_bitmap_create_from_data() has been removed but it's not yet
deprecated in the gtk-2-22 branch, so I can't read about what replaces
it. I see no other simple way to create a GdkBitmap.
Is GdkBitmap meant to be removed complete
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 12:08 +0200, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
> > - GtkRuler (used by dia, claws, possibly xsane; gimp has a fork)
>
> Is this really only used by dia and claws, or also some more
> applications? In contrast to GtkHSV, GtkGamma, etc., I can actually
> imagine that GtkRuler has some
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 15:07 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> http://library.gnome.org/devel/gtk/stable/GtkScrolledWindow.html#ftn.id1043260
>
> The scrolled window installs GtkAdjustment objects in the child
> window's slots using the set_scroll_adjustments_signal, found
> in GtkWidgetClass. (C
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 23:19 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> • gtk-2-90 branch and gtk+ 2.90 release
> - merge gtk-2-90 into master as soon as:
> a) we have stable branches
> b) gtk-2-90 works
> - we have a), and close on b)
I am confused. Will there be a GTK+ 2.22? If so, what git branch is
a
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 15:18 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> I meant that 'height-for-width' is useful, and
> 'width-for-height' is a bit of gravy on top.
>
> That is, "the behavior of text" is useful, the opposite behavior less
> useful.
Tristan, so can you make things easier by cutting out that fea
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:52 +0100, Christian Dywan wrote:
> > But "Do not use it" does not even make that clear. The reader has no
> > idea whether it is something that should never have been used (and
> why
> > not) or something that has a replacement. It shouldn't take much
> > empathy to realize
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 22:36 +0100, Michael Natterer wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 19:59 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > No, "Deprecated: 2.20: Do not use it." is not good enough.
>
> As a matter of fact, it is. There is not supposed to be any
> replacement for the st
1 - 100 of 287 matches
Mail list logo
